Re: [Teas] <draft-sitaraman-sr-rsvp-coexistence-rec> -- Open Thread
Rakesh Gandhi <rgandhi.ietf@gmail.com> Sun, 26 March 2017 09:54 UTC
Return-Path: <rgandhi.ietf@gmail.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 0D7D7128D69 for <teas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 02:54:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.689
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.689 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 PTOzCnmlL2h0 for <teas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 02:54:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-it0-x236.google.com (mail-it0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 41D7B127201 for <teas@ietf.org>; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 02:54:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-it0-x236.google.com with SMTP id w124so45901921itb.1 for <teas@ietf.org>; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 02:54:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=wCM86F1NnJuwVeHLN8uQEkdSOaY31Czu/74SXVzCFeA=; b=gY6EAl0f5yXI0x5GNctLqeVcMIABYVsORTbfFeexV/AKmu5U+Vy3LBdHuFmBNjm1xI 86RtqBLBzx2RI9IIhjiswhDHlaC/HNqEa0bbxXAtACmJR7NNFHw0ghvNXqkP5lo5mpFv SelBfiXQ6NC9nG/FaVs7mSLsBwikXmjGmYaaSDz3KBsXTyLgvQZSUukTapUIpBXmu0rf kb+w+iEoAcYwwuPLYpuk6RVSWoO8zX6VJFxL5BOGqBI/PesQvQsHn/tT11Zpumu/mrVy gQAyH9lExBMMWNngMkoBavmC/RBVcFrgzVRrkReASzrU1fnq6R/QWlhRyzN/9lO9WQgW QRkA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=wCM86F1NnJuwVeHLN8uQEkdSOaY31Czu/74SXVzCFeA=; b=p/zWWYXsReUZ+LPPDH/hP+hgULWuhnCbkTxN2vlp61as4ph0KqnQl8k9S/ditkrcBd qkwXIzjFJ1wOjPPY/bOSN4IoeHjSVl5mpRkcNFPskVS8sk4UHvl4jk3Bde3KJ0MMOLSt cjmSP++zXsd8SDvmTpoQlLro25AkTMzZG9/SXtAnLwQxldJlP+M+A9dfYG9np4bEO4pf ul3O9hF3EDMqUasKZHIodTWEYzOM+mk4IvVyVRv5Jf8piEl7h5RMzYLU2lRVmO6+HNf+ ijoutHtWVTK0xo1GMKQB8jGPp6MarVLacL4ix4K0hGBhgKTvRQIzNjuSJ6xuQZYzpebe LmrA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H2Mdgngiu41cdgkMQKukwxVUScuLqLpRdOASnbZb8BawjfRVfq1HQuG66pYd9MDbPzZpYupRqGjv4zdWg==
X-Received: by 10.36.253.4 with SMTP id m4mr3768494ith.19.1490522043542; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 02:54:03 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.36.22.145 with HTTP; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 02:54:03 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CA+YzgTs-Q_Ab-TMrFosBRmGonXXN0SEJ8DjurJ=bgwSCDjuL-g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+YzgTvPTRAxMK5EGCF1Y2nsSZZhyW_Rq1gQPvieMdCB70c04w@mail.gmail.com> <CAMZsk6cQRvCNC1ob3Y3TD5aXMsOpkbVT9-Qi9B2=LD84GmS5oQ@mail.gmail.com> <CA+YzgTu=GQciOt79DqaN3P=krfDmsB3fYRthqtLknSF29E3D4w@mail.gmail.com> <CA+YzgTtj5SiZXyc26RF6ifW_1hCGegoc0awXTWfsX+D97n0G5w@mail.gmail.com> <CAMZsk6eUf-ECCdbL-iMQyrdhxDBe2BBWL8T3rbVKCYks602x1A@mail.gmail.com> <CA+YzgTs-Q_Ab-TMrFosBRmGonXXN0SEJ8DjurJ=bgwSCDjuL-g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Rakesh Gandhi <rgandhi.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 05:54:03 -0400
Message-ID: <CAMZsk6fJqhXCevkE-3Y7XFzSgoNK-f+SD7m=-DNOGmEa+OdhOA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Vishnu Pavan Beeram <vishnupavan@gmail.com>
Cc: "teas@ietf.org" <teas@ietf.org>, "Rakesh Gandhi (rgandhi)" <rgandhi@cisco.com>, Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.dhody@huawei.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c0312d8ef7627054b9f34ac"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/vbMMsjnHixSRsbtkPWbXd8FkHOU>
Subject: Re: [Teas] <draft-sitaraman-sr-rsvp-coexistence-rec> -- Open Thread
X-BeenThere: teas@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 09:54:07 -0000
Ok, thanks Pavan. On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 6:38 PM, Vishnu Pavan Beeram <vishnupavan@gmail.com> wrote: > Rakesh, Hi! > > Thanks for going through the latest set of diffs. > Please see inline for responses (prefixed VPB) > > Regards, > -Pavan > > On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 4:06 PM, Rakesh Gandhi <rgandhi.ietf@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi Pavan, >> >> Thanks for adding the following text in the document. I have couple of >> examples below for discussion. >> >> >> "A DS-TE LSR that advertises Bandwidth Constraints TLV should update the >> bandwidth constraints for class-types based on operator policy. For >> example, when Russian Dolls Model (RDM) [RFC4127] is in use, then only BC0 >> may be updated. Whereas, when Maximum Allocation Model (MAM) [RFC4125] is >> in use, then all BCs may be updated equally such that the total value >> updated is equal to the newly calculated SR traffic average." >> >> For RDM, if we take an example where max-res-bw is configured as 10, bc0 >> as10 and bc1 as 8. If max-res-bw is reduced by 4, then max-res-bw and bc0 >> will become 6. What about bc1 which is 8 and now > max-res-bw of 6? >> > [VPB] As stated in the draft, the bandwidth constraints for class-types > are updated based on operator policy. As per policy (for RDM), bc0 gets > adjusted first. The adjustment in bc0 may result in other "bc"s also > getting adjusted (if needed). If bc1 is found to be greater than the > adjusted-bc0 then bc1 is set to the same value as the adjusted-bc0 (same > applies for other “bc”s). So, in your example, bc1 would also become 6. > > >> For MAM, if we take an example where max-res-bw is configured as 10, bc0 >> as 8 and bc1 as 5 (BC pools have over-booking of (8+5-10=3) but max-res-bw >> is the limit enforced on the link). If we reduce the max-res-bw by 4 to new >> value 6, we may still keep the bc0 and bc1 as is (but now over-booking is >> more (8+5-6=7) but max-res-bw is still the limit enforced on the link). >> > [VPB] If the policy (for MAM) is to adjust all BCs by an equal amount, > then for your example -- bc0 would be 6 and bc1 would be 3. The overbooking > would remain the same (6+3-6=3). > >> Thoughts? >> > Thanks, >> >> Rakesh >> >> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 2:50 PM, Vishnu Pavan Beeram < >> vishnupavan@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Rakesh, >>> We recently posted a new revision for this draft ( >>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-sitaraman-sr-rsvp-coexistence-rec-02). >>> This new version addresses all comments related to DS-TE. >>> >>> WG, >>> Please do let us know if there are any further questions/comments. At >>> this juncture, we would like to request this draft to be considered for >>> adoption. >>> >>> Regards, >>> -Pavan (as a co-author) >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 4:32 PM, Vishnu Pavan Beeram < >>> vishnupavan@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Rakesh, Hi! >>>> >>>> Thanks for bringing this up. We'll look at adding some text covering >>>> DS-TE in the next version. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> -Pavan >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 4:48 AM, Rakesh Gandhi <rgandhi.ietf@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Pavan, >>>>> >>>>> For the option where max-res-bw is adjusted, it would be good to add >>>>> in the document what happens to Diff-Serve TE BC model RDM, MAM and MAR >>>>> bandwidth pools. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Rakesh >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 10:20 AM, Vishnu Pavan Beeram < >>>>> vishnupavan@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Folks, Hi! >>>>>> >>>>>> We presented <draft-sitaraman-sr-rsvp-coexistence-rec> in >>>>>> yesterday's morning session. Unfortunately, we didn't have any time left to >>>>>> take questions. So, I'm opening up a thread for folks to post their >>>>>> questions/concerns. >>>>>> >>>>>> Dhruv (on cc) had a couple of questions and I'll start this thread >>>>>> with responses to those -- >>>>>> >>>>>> (1) Why can't you do only SR on the controller and leave RSVP-TE >>>>>> control stay distributed? >>>>>> The base requirement for this “co-existence arrangement” is to >>>>>> ensure that the placement of SR LSPs in the same domain DOES NOT introduce >>>>>> any inaccuracies in the TED that is used by distributed or centralized RSVP >>>>>> Path computation engines. If your SR-LSPs are management by a >>>>>> centralized controller and you don't have the SR utilization information >>>>>> somehow reflected in the TED used by distributed RSVP-TE path computation >>>>>> engines, it would result in the TED information being not accurate. >>>>>> >>>>>> (2) With Option-5, wouldn't there be issues if not all nodes in the >>>>>> network support the recommended procedure? >>>>>> You do need the recommended procedure to be applied on all RSVP-TE >>>>>> nodes in the domain. If not, the TED information would not be completely >>>>>> accurate. This is TRUE for the other options as well -- the chosen option >>>>>> would need to be uniformly applied to all relevant nodes in the network. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> -Pavan >>>>>> >>>>>> ps: I believe Rakesh (on cc) had a question as well, but couldn't get >>>>>> his chance. @Rakesh -- Please do post your question here and we (the >>>>>> authors) will respond to it. >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Teas mailing list >>>>>> Teas@ietf.org >>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
- [Teas] <draft-sitaraman-sr-rsvp-coexistence-rec> … Vishnu Pavan Beeram
- Re: [Teas] <draft-sitaraman-sr-rsvp-coexistence-r… Dhruv Dhody
- Re: [Teas] <draft-sitaraman-sr-rsvp-coexistence-r… Vishnu Pavan Beeram
- Re: [Teas] <draft-sitaraman-sr-rsvp-coexistence-r… Rakesh Gandhi
- Re: [Teas] <draft-sitaraman-sr-rsvp-coexistence-r… Vishnu Pavan Beeram
- Re: [Teas] <draft-sitaraman-sr-rsvp-coexistence-r… Vishnu Pavan Beeram
- Re: [Teas] <draft-sitaraman-sr-rsvp-coexistence-r… Rakesh Gandhi
- Re: [Teas] <draft-sitaraman-sr-rsvp-coexistence-r… Vishnu Pavan Beeram
- Re: [Teas] <draft-sitaraman-sr-rsvp-coexistence-r… Rakesh Gandhi