Re: Data-Plane anchors in a control-/data-plane separated deyploment

Hi Pierrick,

thanks for the feedback. Agree that we can avoid the anchor term, since there is always some
expectation on such node. DPE is good, or simply Data-Plane Node (DPN), as we
where using it in the past discussion. No strong opinion here.

The WG may still need to converge on a definition of the term 'anchor', though it
depends solely on the policies being configured and enforced by a data-plane node.
The work team on Advanced Anchor selection started to investigate on this.
Point for the FPSM work is that it's the deployment and configuration which can make
an anchor out of a data-plane node, not a specification and the architecture behind.

marco

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Donnerstag, 18. Dezember 2014 15:10
To: [email protected]; Marco Liebsch
Subject: Re: [DMM] Data-Plane anchors in a control-/data-plane separated deyploment


Hi Marco,



I definitely agree that a DP node can play different role; quoting the PMIP example, a node can play either à MAG or LMA role, or even both rôles. A single name thus makes sense. However, the term anchor is à bit confusing since it refers implicitely to HA/ LMA. So, i suggest to use DPE node, standing for data plane enfoncement node. The DPE can support different functions: tunnel termination, encap, etc....



Pierrick



Envoyé depuis mon Sony Xperia SP d'Orange



---- Marco Liebsch a écrit ----


Folks,

at IETF91 we received the valid comment to converge on a definition of the term 'anchor'.
In the FPSM discussion, we so far distinguished Data-Plane Anchor (DPA), traditionally a downlink encap function,
Data-Plane Node (DPN), which is more located in the access to terminate tunnels, and regular transport nodes.
Another comment was about a scenario where a single flow may traverse multiple DPAs on its way to the
MN.

I'd like to propose and discuss the following:
In a decentralized data-plane and a control-/data-plane separated deployment, I consider it a reasonable
assumption that each of the so far unambiguously named data-plane nodes can take the role of the other.
So, we may solely refer to a single type of function, e.g. Data-Plane Anchor (DPA), which receives policies
from the Control-Plane.
For a certain deployment, it's the Control-Plane that determines the role and associated policies for each involved
DPA.

Data-Plane nodes are agnostic to the role they play in mobility management.
Control-Plane determines the role of each DPA according to the preferred deployment and configures the
policies accordingly.

I think such assumption allows flexible deployment and eases description in our specifications.

I am not good in drawing ASCII, but I gave it a try (for downlink operation only).
Using PMIP6 terms, the middle-DPA in the figure below serves as kind of LMA, left DPA as MAG,
right DPA (one or multiple) may enforce per-host rules for traffic steering.

Would be happy to get your opinion on this proposal.

marco


               +--------------------------+
               |      Control-Plane       |
               +--------------------------+
                |             |         |
                |             |         |
                |             |         |
         \ /    V             V         V
+--+     -o-  +---+         +---+     +---+   +--+
|MN| ---- |---|DPA|<========|DPA|<----|DPA|<--|CN|
+--+      |   +---+         +---+     +---+   +--+
              Rules:       Rules:     Rules:
              Decap,       Encap,     host-route
              Forward      Forward,
                          qos




_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________



Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc

pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler

a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,

Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.



This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;

they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.

If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.

As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.

Thank you.

_______________________________________________
dmm mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm