slide1 n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Tomohiro Otani otani@kddilabs.jp Kenichi Ogaki ogaki@kddilabs.jp PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Tomohiro Otani otani@kddilabs.jp Kenichi Ogaki ogaki@kddilabs.jp

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 6

Tomohiro Otani otani@kddilabs.jp Kenichi Ogaki ogaki@kddilabs.jp - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 102 Views
  • Uploaded on

GMPLS Inter-Domain Routing in support of inter-domain links draft-otani-ccamp-gmpls-routing-interlink-01.txt. Tomohiro Otani otani@kddilabs.jp Kenichi Ogaki ogaki@kddilabs.jp Shuichi Okamoto okamoto@kddilabs.jp. Summary of this draft. This draft

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Tomohiro Otani otani@kddilabs.jp Kenichi Ogaki ogaki@kddilabs.jp' - holden


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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
slide1

GMPLS Inter-Domain Routing in support of inter-domain linksdraft-otani-ccamp-gmpls-routing-interlink-01.txt

Tomohiro Otani otani@kddilabs.jp

Kenichi Ogaki ogaki@kddilabs.jp

Shuichi Okamoto okamoto@kddilabs.jp

70th IETF meeting, Dec. 2007

summary of this draft
Summary of this draft
  • This draft
    • describes the problem of the current GMPLS routing in order to deal with inter-domain TE links for GMPLS inter-domain signaling.
    • states the GMPLS inter-domain routing requirements in support of exchanging of inter-domain TE link information.(Protocol neutral)
  • What are issues at this moment?
    • No mechanism defined to effectively exchange such inter-domain TE link information.

70th IETF meeting, Dec. 2007

assumed network
Assumed network

|

+-------+ +-------+ | +-------+ +-------+

| | | | IDL-out | | | |

| |----//--->|Domain |---------->|Domain |----//----| |

|Ingress| |Border | |Border | |Egress |

| | |Node 1 | IDL-in |Node 2 | | |

| |<---//----| |<----------| |<---//----| |

| | | | | | | | |

+-------+ +-------+ | +-------+ +-------+

|

GMPLS domain 1 | GMPLS domain 2

EGP:

- BGP-4

- none

IGP:

- OSPF

- OSPF-TE

IGP:

- OSPF

- OSPF-TE

Reachability

TE

*IDL: Inter-domain link

70th IETF meeting, Dec. 2007

path computation
Path computation
  • Per-domain path computation or PCE is considered.
  • MPLS LSP case
    • Unidirectional: IDL-out is only required.
    • “draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-interas-te-extension-02.txt” defines static configuration of IDL and the distribution mechanism by IGP.
  • GMPLS LSP case
    • Bi-directional: Both IDL-in and IDL-out are required.
    • TED may not be able to contain IDL-out information if this is statically configured.
    • The path computation might be failed
      • if unidirectional paths are created and available bandwidth of inter-domain links may be asymmetric between IDL-in and IDL-out.
      • if TE information is different between IDL-in and IDL-out.

70th IETF meeting, Dec. 2007

gmpls inter domain routing requirements
GMPLS inter-domain routing requirements
  • In addition to outgoing inter-domain links, incoming inter-domain links with TE information should be distributed to the own domain
    • With appropriate GMPLS attributes such as a switching capability and an encoding type.
    • The TED in each domain can contain inter-domain TE links for path computation. The TED may be synchronized with the database in the PCE.
  • The incoming inter-domain link should be statically and locally configured. A dynamically exchanging mechanism would be preferred reflecting aliveness of adjacent inter-domain border nodes or links.
    • The introduction of this capability should not affect routing scalability and ensure the confidentiality in each domain.

70th IETF meeting, Dec. 2007

next step
Next Step
  • We propose to adopt this as a working group document since this is a critical issue for PCE and CSPF engine at the ingress in GMPLS networks.
  • We will update functional requirements reflecting comments in the list.
  • We will start to investigate protocol definition.

70th IETF meeting, Dec. 2007