[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: revision of architecture draft is now published
However I suppose that the question here is that given that some
considerations about TE should be included in the document, what text
is appropriate here that notes the goal, but references the large body
of work that has been undertaken already on QoS and TE?
Suggestions are, obviously, solicited!
Well, after re-reading the document, it is my impression that the
document actually already contains several references to this point.
First, the document includes it explicitely in the base scenario
Section 2:
In addition there is the potential consideration of being able to
distribute traffic load across a number of network paths according to
some pre-determined objective, as a form of traffic engineering.
which is all that imho is needed in this part of the doc.
After, in section 4.2 the document describes the key point of how path
selection is affected in this new multiaddress configuration
Section 4.2
The further implication here is that path selection (ISP A vs ISP B
transit for incoming packets) is an outcome of the process of
selecting an address for the destination host.
Moreover, in the discussion of section 5.3.1 several considerations
about locator selection are presented.
Perhaps an option would be to include a new subsection in section 5.3
about policy based locator selection.
In this section, it could be possible to highlight that in this new
multiaddress configuration, policy (and TE in general) is no longer
solely achieved through manipulation of the routing system, but a
relevant part of the path selection is performed through address
selection and that it is possible to achieve policing and TE by
influencing locator selection process. In particular a reference RFC
3484 and its policy table could be useful.
Another interesting point that could be considered in the analysis is
that the element that performs the locator selection (host or edge
router) determines also policy, so the choice of using packet rewriting
or host based locator selection shifts the policy capability from one
element to the other.
this is relevant imho, because if hosts perform policing, then a more
fine grained policy is simpler to achieve, because hosts can select
locators depending for instance in the application that is sending
traffic. However, policy configuration in every host may be a
management problem. Finally, policy enforcement may be rather
challenging when the host based approach is used, since it is up to the
hosts themselves. In the edge router case, policy enforcement by router
is more similar to what we have today imho.
well, this kind of stuff is what i think could be interesting to
include in the analysis, since may be relevant for instance when
selecting between the host based and the edge router based locator
selection.
Regards, marcelo
thanks,
Geoff