RE: TE/CT Configuration scalability

Hello,

Expanding on Ina's response.

The TE-Class Mapping need NOT be the same in different Autonomous
Systems which are span by a given inter-AS DS-TE LSP. It may be that AS1
supports 4 preemption priorities within its AS for CT1, while AS2 only
supports 2 preemption priorities within its AS for CT1.=20

Now, the two AS administrators certainly have to carefully agree on a
number of things before they can support inter-AS LSPs; like which CTs
they are allowed to use across ASes,  which preemption, how much maximum
bandwidth etc. But but this is how Diffserv works anyway independently
of DS-TE: for inter-AS Diffserv, operators have to agree on which
classes they want to share, which marking, what maximum rate for each,
and then configure mechansisms such as Traffic Conditioning accordingly.
DS-TE just fits in this existing Diffserv mode of operations.

Cheers

Francois

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [email protected]=20
>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ina Minei
>> Sent: jeudi 1 juillet 2004 19:26
>> To: [email protected]
>> Cc: [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: TE/CT Configuration scalability
>>=20
>>=20
>> 	Lionel,
>>=20
>> 	I assume your question is "can I establish an inter-as=20
>> diffserv-te
>> lsp given the requirement for uniform TE-class=20
>> configuration" ? The answer
>> is yes.
>>=20
>> 	The reason for having a requirement for uniform TE-Class
>> configuration is because of the way IGP siganling is defined in the
>> te-proto draft. If instead of only advertising 8 values out of the 64
>> possible (ct, prio) combinations we would have advertised=20
>> all 64, there
>> wouldn't have been the concept of TE-classes or the=20
>> requirement to keep
>> them uniform.
>>=20
>> 	The only thing we get from the requirement is to be able to
>> consistently set up an LSP conforming to some SLAs within=20
>> one domain. So
>> what happens when you cross to a different domain? All you=20
>> need to do is
>> translate the LSP's SLAs to the necessary parameters in the=20
>> new domain.
>>=20
>> 	There is no requirement to signal the TE-class matrix across
>> domains.
>>=20
>> 			Ina
>>=20
>> On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 [email protected] wrote:
>>=20
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > draft-ietf-tewg-diff-te-proto-07, "Protocol extensions for=20
>> support of
>> > Differentiated-Service-aware MPLS Traffic Engineering" states:-
>> >
>> > "To ensure coherent DS-TE operation, the network administrator MUST
>> > configure exactly the same TE-Class Mapping on all LSRs of=20
>> the DS-TE
>> > domain"
>> >
>> > How does this idea of identical TE/CT configuration work=20
>> over multiple
>> > domains? Is there any possibility of interoperability?
>> >
>> >=20
>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>> ---------------------------------------
>> >
>> > Lionel Silman,  System, Optical Networks Division, ECI Telecom
>> > Tel    Work: +972 (3) 9266007; Home: +972 (3) 6417464
>> >
>> >
>>=20
>>=20