[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Idr] Response to comments on generalized RT constrain solution



Title: RE: [Idr] Response to comments on generalized RT constrain solution

Hi Robert, Mike

I agree your opinion, it will confuse our Ops a great deal.

Guan




-----Original Message-----
From: idr-bounces at ietf.org on behalf of Mike Benjamin
Sent: Fri 11/13/2009 6:16 PM
To: Robert Raszuk
Cc: idr at ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Idr] Response to comments on generalized RT constrain solution

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 02:40:41PM +0900, Robert Raszuk wrote:
: Jie,
:
: >In most networks different
: >kind of VPNs are deployed gradually based on the demand of customers. Thus
: >it is impossible to make a plan for deployment of all kinds of VPNs at the
: >beginning. And this would also affect the flexibility of deployment of new
: >VPN services.
:
: There is many years of operational experience in deployment of various
: VPN services today. AFAIK non of the deployments today have found this
: to be of any practical issue.
:
: I think it would be great at this point to hear from operator's
: community if they see a recommendation for unique RT assignment for
: different customers/services as a problem.


The current RT method is the preferable method from our perspective.

Even if the possibility to re-use RTs based on AFI existed, we would
avoid using it for the sake of our operations teams.  To us the RT
represents a network, regardless of address type within that network.
If that network is IPv4 today and later wants to enable IPv6, we
expect it to exist within the same topology.  If our customer wants a
*different* network topology to exist for the new address family,
that is a different network, and now a different RT.

From a design/scale perspective I can see this being slightly useful
to preserve memory where the topology does not require a route (read;
mixed v4/v6 network, but one PE does not handle any v4 connectivity),
but I see this more as a solution looking for a problem than anything.

As a service provider, I would not support its introduction.

--mikeb



: Thx,
: R.
: _______________________________________________
: Idr mailing list
: Idr at ietf.org
: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr

--
Mike Benjamin   -     +1-602-744-3403
mikeb at gblx.net  - Development Engineering
Global Crossing -       Phoenix, USA
_______________________________________________
Idr mailing list
Idr at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr

--

Kabel Deutschland bietet Ihnen Fernsehen, Internet und Telefonie aus einer Hand. Informieren Sie sich ueber unsere Produkte unter www.kabeldeutschland.de
Diese E-Mail und etwaige Anhaenge enthalten vertrauliche und/oder rechtlich geschuetzte Informationen. Wenn Sie nicht der richtige Adressat sind, benachrichtigen Sie bitte den Absender und vernichten Sie anschliessend diese Mail und die Anlagen.

--

Kabel Deutschland GmbH
Betastr. 6-8
85774 Unterfoehring
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Dr. Adrian von Hammerstein, Erik Adams, Dr. Manuel Cubero del Castillo-Olivares, Paul Thomason
Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Prof. Dr. Heinz Riesenhuber
Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Muenchen HRB 145 837, Sitz der Gesellschaft: Unterfoehring

------------

Kabel Deutschland Vertrieb und Service GmbH & Co. KG
Betastr. 6-8
85774 Unterfoehring
Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Muenchen HRA 83902, Sitz der Gesellschaft: Unterfoehring
Komplementaerin: Kabel Deutschland Verwaltungs GmbH, Amtsgericht Muenchen, HRB 145 835, Sitz der Gesellschaft: Unterfoehring
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Dr. Adrian von Hammerstein, Erik Adams, Dr. Manuel Cubero del Castillo-Olivares, Paul Thomason

------------

Kabel Deutschland Breitband Services GmbH
Betastr. 6-8
85774 Unterfoehring
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Dr. Adrian von Hammerstein, Erik Adams, Dr. Manuel Cubero del Castillo-Olivares, Paul Thomason
Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Muenchen HRB 122 932, Sitz der Gesellschaft: Unterfoehring

------------