1 / 9

Iptel working group

Iptel working group. IETF 49. Agenda. Agenda Bashing [Rosenberg] 5 mins Working Group Update [Rosenberg] 5 mins Service Codes [Peterson] 15 mins TRIP MIB [Walker] 15 mins Intra-Domain Architecture [Rosenberg] 15 mins CPL Authorization [Kuthan] 15 mins

dana
Download Presentation

Iptel working group

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Iptel working group IETF 49

  2. Agenda • Agenda Bashing [Rosenberg] 5 mins • Working Group Update [Rosenberg] 5 mins • Service Codes [Peterson] 15 mins • TRIP MIB [Walker] 15 mins • Intra-Domain Architecture [Rosenberg] 15 mins • CPL Authorization [Kuthan] 15 mins • Working Group future directions [Rosenberg] 30 mins

  3. CPL Specification Draft –03 IESG last call made Nov 17 Under AD review now Interop testing done at last bakeoff! CPLs created by Indigo tool sent and processed by dynamicsoft interpreter TRIP Specification WG last call issued on Draft –04 on Nov 29 Authentication stuff removed, since HBH using IPSec seems to work fine for us for now WG Update

  4. Main Observation: Routes amongst proxies within a domain dependent on policy Underlying layer 3 network already provides connectivity! Proxies within a domain thus only exist as policy units Shortest path is not the objective Intra-Domain Architecture

  5. Example Network NY POP Customer Facing Proxies CA POP POLICY: +1212 to NY +1415 to CA Each backs up The other

  6. Gateways propagate routes with specific weights Very difficult to manage Preferred approach Gateways simply push their routes up to load balancing proxies Load balancing proxies select gateway based on locally programmed algorithms Push aggregate POP reachability up towards customer access point Customer access proxies decide when to use which POP, maybe per customer How to achieve policy?

  7. Groups of proxies within a domain look like their own mini-domain Makes sense to use TRIP for intra-mini-domains What needs to change? Additional params and attributes Gateway capacity, codecs, local preferences, etc. Architectural Model

  8. Is “last hop” from gateway to proxies that front it a push or pull protocol? Push Faster Better for policy Security model makes more sense Ideal for point to point case Pull Good for large fan outs Allows gateways to be used by any type of client Open Issue ? INV INV

  9. Current chartered items are complete We need to shut down or re-charter What might we work on? TRIP MIB (needed for draft) Intra-domain architectures and protocols Gateway registration Service routing CPL-NG CPL MIB WG Future

More Related