[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Idr] draft on virtual aggregation
Paul,
This is not a hack. In fact all what this is about can be accomplished
today by sitting down and configuring three routers: edge, lookup
router and egress (an option).
Are you saying here that no router modifications are needed to make this
work ?
To make this work in the simplest form what is required is:
*A* Ability to attract traffic to lookup routers (Done)
*B* Ability to label switch to lookup router (Done)
*C* Ability to prevent sending what is in the RIB to FIB if not needed
(This is vendor dependent anyway - does not require any standard work)
*D* Ability to forward traffic to external peer without lookup on the
edge ASBR (This is also quite implementation dependent but with PHP and
embedded service label this could be accomplished)
If someone really want to divide the addressing
space as Paul suggest marking can be reg community. This is provider
contained solution - it does not cross any inter-as boundaries.
I'm not sure what you mean by "marking can be reg community". Can you expand
a bit?
The community marking is needed only in the case of address space
segmentation per lookup router in order for edge routers to recognize
which out of the prefixes they receive should end up in FIB and which
would only go as far as global RIB.
Such marking should be possible with standard community.
All this document attempts to is present such option for operators.
Some may find them useful some may not.
I'm concerned that the folks that may find them useful (lower-tier ISPs)
aren't typically involved in IDR or IETF for that matter. If there are folks
listening who can speak for lower-tier ISPs, please do so. (My knowledge
here, such as it is, is all second- or third-hand.)
I agree that IETF is not the best forum for that :). Much better would
be NANOG, SANOG, APRICOT, JPNOG, RIPE etc ...
For all of this fast restoration stuff, I gather you are thinking in terms of
the core-edge structure that most (all?) tier-1 ISPs have? Is your point
that simply shrinking the number of routers that have to participate in
re-routing will help scale ASBR/PE failure detection, and that we don't need
explicit new mechanisms along these lines (i.e. BGP Virtual Link Attribute)?
Exactly. It helps scaling fast failure detection but what is more
important it limits number of nodes where the redundant BGP paths must
be present both in RIB and FIB.
Cheers,
R.
_______________________________________________
Idr mailing list
Idr at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr