Re: Multi-AS needs : draft-zhang-mpls-interas-te-req-02.txt

"LE ROUX Jean-Louis FTRD/DAC/LAN" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.tewg
Message-ID <1FB136FD10CE33409C882630E299F5BED0FA40@lanmhs30.rd.francetelecom.fr>


>Why can't strict trans-as qos gaurentees be obtained today?

Because there is currently no scalable mechanism providing an optimal
placement of trans-as flows with QoS constraints.
This definitvely requires E2E Constraint Based Routing provided by
MPLS-TE.  

+ currently no FRR for inter-AS links and ASBRs

Thus the reason is IMHO clearly technical.

Regards 

JL



-----Message d'origine-----
De : Jim Boyle [mailto:[email protected]]
Envoye : jeudi 6 mars 2003 20:48
A : LE ROUX Jean-Louis FTRD/DAC/LAN
Cc : [email protected]
Objet : RE: Multi-AS needs : draft-zhang-mpls-interas-te-req-02.txt



Why can't strict trans-as qos gaurentees be obtained today?

Is the reason technical or "other"?



On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, LE ROUX Jean-Louis FTRD/DAC/LAN wrote:

> Hi Jim and all
> 
> 
> >Scenario 4 looks right up our alley though.  So I have to ask - what
> about 
> >current protocol specifications limits you from trying a few
different 
> >approaches to Multi-AS TE?
> 
> One of the various applications of inter-AS MPLS-TE is the
provisioning
> of L2VPN services with PEs located in two distinct ASs.
> Typically such services have strict end-to-end QoS requirements that
can
> definitively not be ensured with current intra AS TE mechanisms.
> Indeed a combination of intra-AS TE deployment cannot provide e2e TE,
> e2e QoS, inter-AS link protection, ASBR protection,...
> 
> Regards
> 
> JL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Jim Boyle [mailto:[email protected]]
> Envoye : mardi 4 mars 2003 18:11
> A : [email protected]
> Objet : Multi-AS needs : draft-zhang-mpls-interas-te-req-02.txt
> 
> 
> 
> It seems to me that there are a few different requirements in this
> draft, 
> taking a look at the scenarios in section 4, we have
> 
> 1) Virtual POP - extend network through another's, place your
> 	edge router (PE) in someone elses POP w/o direct connectivity
> 	to your network.
> 
> 2) Similar to 4.1, but in this case virtually extend your edge port
> 	onto another providers router (or all the way to customer).
> 
> 3) CE to CE w/ QOS quarantees from multiple providers
> 
> 4) Multi-AS TE within one Provider (e.g. global)
> 
> 5) Extend one's network through another
> 
> Scenarios 1-3 and 5 to me just seem to be inter-provider VPN
> requirements 
> (w/ a little QoS for flavor).  So it seems the bulk of the discussion 
> should happen elsewhere, right?
> 
> Scenario 4 looks right up our alley though.  So I have to ask - what
> about 
> current protocol specifications limits you from trying a few different

> approaches to Multi-AS TE?
> 
> thanks,
> 
> Jim
> 
> 
>
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.