IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-li-v6ops-load-balancing-requirement-00.txt

Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Tue, 05 July 2011 05:32 UTC

Return-Path: <randy@psg.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2C4D11E80A6 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Jul 2011 22:32:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.572
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.572 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.027, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id J6JbHo0a5C8t for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Jul 2011 22:32:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::36]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2CBA11E808B for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Jul 2011 22:32:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=rair.psg.com.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <randy@psg.com>) id 1QdyFX-000Pv3-7t; Tue, 05 Jul 2011 05:32:43 +0000
Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2011 14:32:42 +0900
Message-ID: <m2mxgte1hh.wl%randy@psg.com>
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <201107041355.p64Dt0320469@ftpeng-update.cisco.com>
References: <201107041355.p64Dt0320469@ftpeng-update.cisco.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 04 Jul 2011 23:31:23 -0700
Cc: IPv6 Ops WG <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-li-v6ops-load-balancing-requirement-00.txt
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2011 05:32:45 -0000

> A new draft has been posted, at
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-li-v6ops-load-balancing-requirement. Please
> take a look at it and comment.

fred, i am confused.  almost all the technologies [0] mentioned indeed
'force' a path.  and indeed in some cases, these paths could concentrate
packets which might otherwise be more diversely forwarded.  but that's
life in the big city.

so that leaves me only seeing that the document is about when services
have multiple and diverse servers.  so how is this different than ipv4
where, for example, we use load balancers when near servers which need
scale and use anycast when we want diversity and resiliency?

what should i have learned from this document?  clue bat, please.

randy

--

[0] - note that most of these are non-transition technologies

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email