Re: Request for WG adoption of draft-bashandy-rtgwg-bgp-pic-02.txt

Support adoption. There are mature implementations of this.

thanks--shyam

On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 4:25 PM, Ahmed Bashandy (bashandy) <
bashandy@cisco.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> This is the latest version of the BGP-PIC draft that was presented on
> Nov/2/15 during the IETF-94 meeting in Yokohama
> We have addressed the comments as follows:
> - Added statements in multiple places, including the abstract, indicating
> the need for more than one BGP path
> - Added example in Section 2.3.3 with illustrations in Figure 4,5,6 on how
> to handle a platform that does not support the required number of hierarchy
> levels.  Section 4.3 explains the gradual degradation of BGP-PIC benefit as
> a result of the reduced platform support
> - For handling unlabeled traffic in case PE-CE failure, the last bullet in
> Section 4.2.2 indicates that an egress PE must always treat a core facing
> path as a backup path to avoid looping the packet in case of PE-CE link
> failure. The first statement in Section 5.1 indicates that the draft does
> not cover the failure of a CE node
>
>
> We would like to request adoption of the draft.
>
> Thanks
>
> Ahmed
>
>
>
> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: New Version Notification for
> draft-bashandy-rtgwg-bgp-pic-02.txt Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2015 16:05:59 -0800 From:
> <internet-drafts@ietf.org> <internet-drafts@ietf.org> To: Clarence
> Filsfils <cfilsfil@cisco.com> <cfilsfil@cisco.com>, Ahmed Bashandy
> <bashandy@cisco.com> <bashandy@cisco.com>, Prodosh Mohapatra
> <mpradosh@yahoo.com> <mpradosh@yahoo.com>, "Pradosh Mohapatra"
> <mpradosh@yahoo.com> <mpradosh@yahoo.com>
>
> A new version of I-D, draft-bashandy-rtgwg-bgp-pic-02.txt
> has been successfully submitted by Ahmed Bashandy and posted to the
> IETF repository.
>
> Name:		draft-bashandy-rtgwg-bgp-pic
> Revision:	02
> Title:		Abstract
> Document date:	2015-11-09
> Group:		Individual Submission
> Pages:		26
> URL:            https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-bashandy-rtgwg-bgp-pic-02.txt
> Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bashandy-rtgwg-bgp-pic/
> Htmlized:       https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bashandy-rtgwg-bgp-pic-02
> Diff:           https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-bashandy-rtgwg-bgp-pic-02
>
> Abstract:
> In the network comprising thousands of iBGP peers exchanging millions
> of routes, many routes are reachable via more than one path. Given
> the large scaling targets, it is desirable to restore traffic after
> failure in a time period that does not depend on the number of BGP
> prefixes. In this document we proposed an architecture by which
> traffic can be re-routed to ECMP or pre-calculated backup paths in a
> timeframe that does not depend on the number of BGP prefixes. The
> objective is achieved through organizing the forwarding chains in a
> hierarchical manner and sharing forwarding elements among the maximum
> possible number of routes. The proposed technique achieves prefix
> independent convergence while ensuring incremental deployment,
> complete transparency and automation, and zero management and
> provisioning effort. It is noteworthy to mention that the benefits of
> BGP-PIC are hinged on the existence of more than one path whether as
> ECMP or primary-backup.
>
>
>
>
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
>
> The IETF Secretariat
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtgwg mailing list
> rtgwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
>
>