Re: [spring] WG Adoption Call for draft-dong-spring-sr-for-enhanced-vpn

[Tarek Saad <[e-mail]>]

Hi WG/authors,

My understanding is this draft proposes allocation of per VTN resource-aware SID for each topological element in a network.

This means a specific node may carry per VTN state (in control plane and dataplane) for each topological element (node or link).
In general, to avoid state explosion, SR endorses carrying additional information/context inside the packet.

In draft-bestbar-spring-scalable-ns, we propose to carry a separate ID inside the packet that allows a node to identify the packet belonging to slice-aggregate (or VTN). This decouples SR SIDs used to steer on topological elements from the dataplane ID needed to infer a slice-aggregate (or VTN) so to enforce a specific forwarding treatment. This avoids the per VTN SID state explosion in control and data plane.

Also, when resource allocation/reservation is strictly done in the control plane, it appears per VTN resource SIDs would not serve any further benefit. In fact, a PCE or ingress can readily use the regular SIDs to steer any packet along a specific path that satisfies the requested resources guarantees as verified in the control plane.

Lastly, I draw your attention to draft-bestbar-teas-ns-packet which proposes a network wide slice policy as a vehicle that allows allocation of control and/or dataplane resources for each slice-aggregate (or VTN) on specific network elements.

Regards,
Tarek

On 1/27/21, 6:46 AM, "spring on behalf of James Guichard" <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> on behalf of [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:

Dear WG:

This message starts a 2 week WG adoption call for https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dong-spring-sr-for-enhanced-vpn/ ending February 10th 2021.

After review of the document please indicate support (or not) for WG adoption to the mailing list and if you are willing to work on the document, please state this explicitly. This gives the chairs an indication of the energy level of people in the working group willing to work on this document. Please also provide comments/reasons for your support (or lack thereof) as this is a stronger way to indicate your (non) support as this is not a vote.

Thanks!

Jim, Bruno & Joel





Juniper Business Use Only