IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Teas] Connectivity matrix in draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo

Igor Bryskin <Igor.Bryskin@huawei.com> Mon, 23 May 2016 13:52 UTC

Return-Path: <Igor.Bryskin@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FE5612D8F8 for <teas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 May 2016 06:52:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.646
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.646 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Fr5sahVEWndM for <teas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 May 2016 06:52:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BC6DE12D8F7 for <teas@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 May 2016 06:52:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml702-cah.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id CPI52701; Mon, 23 May 2016 13:52:01 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from DFWEML701-CAH.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.175) by lhreml702-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.99) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.235.1; Mon, 23 May 2016 14:52:00 +0100
Received: from DFWEML501-MBX.china.huawei.com ([10.193.5.178]) by dfweml701-cah.china.huawei.com ([10.193.5.175]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Mon, 23 May 2016 06:51:53 -0700
From: Igor Bryskin <Igor.Bryskin@huawei.com>
To: Cyril Margaria <cyril.margaria@gmail.com>, Xufeng Liu <xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [Teas] Connectivity matrix in draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo
Thread-Index: AdGvdpxN0yo8TMwnRjC4jbLnP05ymwFvMywAAA51YLA=
Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 13:51:53 +0000
Message-ID: <0C72C38E7EBC34499E8A9E7DD007863908EDCB0A@dfweml501-mbx>
References: <02d101d1af76$b0317cd0$10947670$@gmail.com> <CADOd8-ueX_DJc-kZwNXjuu964vXAXWm=HOHGZY2ML74ok4g6=Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CADOd8-ueX_DJc-kZwNXjuu964vXAXWm=HOHGZY2ML74ok4g6=Q@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.212.253.100]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_0C72C38E7EBC34499E8A9E7DD007863908EDCB0Adfweml501mbx_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A090204.57430B02.013C, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=0.0.0.0, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: ab9c02f803473b3c816b6bb401f2f1e5
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/8oGVBzKmvwctsjJqNfchmgCbwfw>
Cc: TEAS WG <teas@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Teas] Connectivity matrix in draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo
X-BeenThere: teas@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Traffic Engineering Architecture and Signaling working group discussion list <teas.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/teas>, <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/teas/>
List-Post: <mailto:teas@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas>, <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 13:52:07 -0000

Cyril,

You are absolutely right. But this belongs to the layer specific augmentations, agreed?

On the other hand I do a see a value in adding an abstract label to the connectivity matrix (just like a label object in the TE path), so the basic model will be more complete to address more than one layer.

Igor

From: Teas [mailto:teas-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Cyril Margaria
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2016 9:41 AM
To: Xufeng Liu
Cc: TEAS WG
Subject: Re: [Teas] Connectivity matrix in draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo

Hi,
Another item that can be considered is to add a Label (Following RFC7579) restrictions. This is needed, for example,  in case of Fixed muxponders, where the connectivity between the Low order ODUs to the high-order ODU is fixed on each end.
Can it be added to the list of changes for the connectivity matrix?

Thanks,
Cyril

On 16 May 2016 at 09:27, Xufeng Liu <xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.com<mailto:xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.com>> wrote:
Authors and contributors have discussed the use case of abstract topology,
to address the incompleteness of connectivity matrix.

Current connectivity modeling is as follows:

      |     +--rw connectivity-matrix* [id]
      |     |  +--rw id            uint32
      |     |  +--rw from
      |     |  |  +--rw tp-ref?   leafref
      |     |  +--rw to
      |     |  |  +--rw tp-ref?   leafref
      |     |  +--rw is-allowed?   Boolean

A Link TP may connect or disconnect to another Link TP, without detailed
information such as cost and resource sharing restriction. To get a better
abstraction of such connectivity, the following additional attributes are
planned to be added:

  max-bandwidth?               decimal64
  max-resv-bandwidth?          decimal64
  unreserved-bandwidth* [priority]
  priority     uint8
     +-- bandwidth?   decimal64
     +-- te-default-metric uint32
  performance-metric // re-use the container from te-link-atrributes
  te-srlgs           // re-use the container from te-link-atrributes

Comments are welcome.

Thanks,

- Xufeng


_______________________________________________
Teas mailing list
Teas@ietf.org<mailto:Teas@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email