RE: AW: Differentiated Routing, not only plain rambo-SPF
"Ayyasamy, Senthilkumar (UMKC-Student)" <[email protected]> Tue, 13 Aug 2002 10:13:27 -0500
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.research.irtf |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
> I am sorry, but there is no signalling (like RSVP, RSVP-TE,=20 > CR-LDP) for doing DiffRout. My mistake here.. But diffrout has few goals in common with the RPIs *BANANAS* traffic engineering framework but sometimes complimentary too. The best suggestion might be ..why cant=20 you come up with some very rough draft version.So that, we=20 can be clear that we are discussing the same scheme. I have=20 one picture of diffrout, some others think that as diffser-TE=20 and so , it is better if we have some notes before discussion. >=20 > Based on the information exchanged by the routing protocol=20 > (like OSPF) all nodes should be able to > compute the same smallest size tree which interconnects the=20 > edge routers (those with attached users or attached external=20 > interfaces), and which complies to some specific constraints=20 > (QoS/BW/Policy,eventually avoiding overlaps with other=20 > road systems),and which are associated to the same DSCP(s). =20 > // plural: see my previous email from today >=20 > But there is no signalling as to "establish the=20 > DSCP-associated road system" !!! >=20 > However,it would be a fancy but completely new task to=20 > determine and establish an MPLS-road system, > which may lock MPLS-traffic into such slim Smallest Size Tree=20 > graphs. See all my work on establishing > the "road systems for VPNs" based on elementary+ hierarchical LSPs. >=20 > Heinrich >=20 >=20 >=20 > -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Ayyasamy, Senthilkumar (UMKC-Student) [mailto:[email protected]] > Gesendet: Dienstag, 13. August 2002 16:40 > An: Naidu, Venkata; Hummel Heinrich; Manfredi, Albert E > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] > Betreff: RE: AW: Differentiated Routing, not only plain rambo-SPF >=20 >=20 >=20 > > -> yes,it is similar; > > -> but here it is about state-less IP forwarding, i.e. about=20 > > -> forwarding the individual IP packets, without any > > -> RSVP path and without any MPLS path. > >=20 > > Oh! Ok...you would like to do Crankback in > > connection less IP environments?!? > >=20 > > In such a case, you might find below paper interesting: > > http://www.ecse.rpi.edu/Homepages/shivkuma/research/papers/te- > > latest.pdf > I have studied this paper. Your are mis-interpreting here. The RPI > paper is an increment to OSPF or BGP for some traffic engineering > functionalties. It doesnt require signaling whereas, diffrout=20 > requires signaling. Also, we are taking more from a diffserv=20 > point of view. > As i told, routing in peer to peer networks and some overlay=20 > systems can use diffrout concept. We can explore certain non- > cooperative algorithms for an alternative to SPF. But as mentioned > before, this will not work out if we see from an engineering=20 > perspective.=20 >=20 > >=20 > > There was some discussion in E2E list regarding > > pros & cons of this approach. I couldn't find the URL > > but I vaguely remember that the subject of the discussion > > is "EC++N" or something like that... >=20 _______________________________________________ Irtf-rr mailing list [email protected] http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/irtf-rr