Re: [rbridge] Call for draft-tissa-trill-cmt-00 to WG draft

["Tissa Senevirathne (tsenevir)" <[e-mail]>]

Mingui

 

We have had these discussions before and to recapping below for the benefit of the WG mailist:

 

1.       Multi topology is a complex solution that involve lot more than a single TLV. Using multi-topology to solve this is like taking canon to kill a mosquito

2.       TRILL deployments are in it’s infancy (to the point nonexistent in  deployments)  and these backward compatibility issues you are talking is simply academic at this time. Bringing multi topology to Just to solve that academic scenario is making it more complex than what is required. (Note: we do have backward compatibility mode)

3.       What we need right now is a simpler solution to support active-active edge

4.       Lastly not all people need active-active deployments may *not* even want to run multi-topology. So tying active-active to multi-topology is saying everyone must deploy multi-topology if and when they need active-active solution. Which is non starter in most deployments.

 

In summary: If you have great ideas on how to use multi-topology to implement active-active edge then that should be followed up as part of the multi-topology. What we need now is a simplified approach that can be present in all deployments. Hence CMT draft can move forward independently.

 

 

From: Mingui Zhang [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2012 2:11 PM
To: [e-mail]; Tissa Senevirathne (tsenevir)
Cc: Donald Eastlake; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: 答复: [rbridge] Call for draft-tissa-trill-cmt-00 to WG draft

 

Yes, CMT is incapable to be incrementally deployed in an RBridges campus. It requires that all RBridges in one campus to be updated to support the Affinity TLV.

 

Actually, the capability that Multi-Topology TRILL can physically segregate data traffic can be used to solve the same RPFC problem in the active-active multi-homing. And, it can be designed to be well "incrementally deploy-able". 

 

Best regards,

Mingui

 

________________________________

发件人: [e-mail] [[e-mail]] 代表 [e-mail] [[e-mail]]
发送时间: 2012年3月27日 19:18
到: Tissa Senevirathne (tsenevir)
Cc: Donald Eastlake; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
主题: Re: [rbridge] Call for draft-tissa-trill-cmt-00 to WG draft


Hi Tissa 

In your CMT draft, if one old RBridge is momitored not supporting affinitive-TLV, the CMT function will be disbale in all the TRILL campus. In my mind, that's your discussion for backward compatibility in CMT. So CMT can not work until all the RBridges support affinitive-TLV. 

However, in the PN draft, there is no such backward compatibiltiy. PN draft employs pseudo-LSP to announce the pseudo-nickname and members of a virtual RBridge. If the pseudo-nickname and the members are configured statically by network administors, no hello PDUs are necessary between the members of a virtual RB group. So the pseudo-LSP method given in PN draft can also work for the scenario described in your CMT draft. 


Thanks,
Zhai Hongjun
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Protocol Development Dept.VI, Central R&D Institute, ZTE Corporation
No. 68, Zijinghua Road, Yuhuatai District, Nanjing, P.R.China, 210012

Zhai Hongjun

Tel: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""





"Tissa Senevirathne (tsenevir)" <[e-mail]> 
发件人:  [e-mail] 

2012-03-27 18:12 

收件人

<[e-mail]>, "Donald Eastlake" <[e-mail]> 

抄送

[e-mail], [e-mail] 

主题

Re: [rbridge] Call for draft-tissa-trill-cmt-00 to WG draft

 

		




Hi Hu 
  
CMT draft discuss about backward compatibility  and your assessment of RPF failure when older RBridges present is incorrect. 
  
Additionally I am not clear PN draft can be utilized for the scenario described in the CMT. Per the discussion we have in Taipie, most Data Centers and Enterprise have multi home devices connected to the TRILL edge. They will not let LAN Hello to pass through them because of the LAG bundling at the edge. Please refer to the reference topology in the draft. Hence CMT draft address very crucial deployment scenario. 
  
Thanks 
Tissa 
  
From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of [e-mail]
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 9:41 PM
To: Donald Eastlake
Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [rbridge] Call for draft-tissa-trill-cmt-00 to WG draft 
  

Hi,all 

We have discussed that there is back compatibility issue for CMT. Only if all the member RBridge of a virtual group support Affinity sub-tlv, the CMT can work correctly. If one of the member does't announce the virtual RBridge nickname and the Affinity sub-tlv, there may exist RPC check failure for the virtual RBridge. The issue that CMT try to solve is not an essential and key issue for trill, and CMT should be a optional solution. Some RBridges may not implement the feature. I wonder whether the CMT will does work actually because of the back compatibility issue. 

There is another solution (pseudonode nickname) solves the same issue. I suggest we should do further discussion with CMT and compare with the two solutions. 

Thanks

Donald Eastlake <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> > 
发件人:  [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>  

2012-03-27 06:38 

 

收件人

[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>  

抄送

	
主题

[rbridge] Call for draft-tissa-trill-cmt-00 to WG draft


  

 

		





During the TRILL session today, there was a consensus of those in the
room to make draft-tissa-trill-cmt-00.txt a TRILL WG draft. This is a
call on the WG mailing list to confirm that consensus. If you wish to
respond, please do so by April 10th.

Thanks,
Donald
=============================
Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   [phone] (cell)
155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> 

_______________________________________________
rbridge mailing list
[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> 
http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/rbridge <http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/rbridge> 
_______________________________________________
rbridge mailing list
[e-mail]
http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/rbridge



--------------------------------------------------------
ZTE Information Security Notice: The information contained in this mail is solely property of the sender's organization. This mail communication is confidential. Recipients named above are obligated to maintain secrecy and are not permitted to disclose the contents of this communication to others.
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the originator of the message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender.
This message has been scanned for viruses and Spam by ZTE Anti-Spam system.

_______________________________________________
rbridge mailing list
[e-mail]
http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/rbridge