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

Re: [PCN] New edge behaviour:draft-karagiannis-pcn-hose-edge-behaviour-00



Hello Georgios,

I think that the proposed combination of signalling and PCN-marking
really has advantages for solving the ECMP issue and am interested in
seeing how it would perform (in both the trunk and HOSE model). I think
the draft clearly explains the proposed mechanisms. I have two minor
remarks:

1) Maybe the addition of a short description of the actual ECMP problem
that is solved here would make the draft more complete.

2) Section 2, bullet 5a says:
	
"the interior SHOULD preferentially drop unmarked packets instead of
marked packets". 

Shouldn't this be changed into:

"the interior node SHOULD preferentially drop unmarked or Threshold
marked packets instead of Excess marked packets"?

Best regards,
Arjen 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: pcn-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:pcn-bounces at ietf.org] On 
> Behalf Of Georgios Karagiannis
> Sent: woensdag 21 oktober 2009 15:59
> To: pcn at ietf.org
> Subject: [PCN] New edge 
> behaviour:draft-karagiannis-pcn-hose-edge-behaviour-00
> 
> 
>  Hi all
> 
> During the last two IETF meetings I had promissed to publish 
> the HOSE edge behaviour draft.
> 
> Via the following URL you can find this draft:
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-karagiannis-pcn-hose-edge-behavio
> ur-00.txt
> 
> If you have any comments please let me know!
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------
> 
>    Abstract ++
> 
>    Precongestion notification (PCN) is a means for protecting 
> quality of
>    service for inelastic traffic admitted to a Diffserv domain.  The
>    overall PCN architecture is described in RFC 5559.  This 
> memo is one
>    of a series describing possible boundary node behaviours for a PCN
>    domain.  The behaviour described here is denoted as the HOSE model.
>    In this document the term HOSE is referring to the
>    aggregation of incoming traffic from all ingress edges, which is
>    associated with one traffic class, i.e., PHB, towards one egress
>    edge.  This type of HOSE model is equivalent to the 
> Multiple Point to
>    Point (MP2P) type of aggregation.
> 
>    The HOSE model ensures bandwidth limits without the need of
>    maintaining per each ingress and egress pair ingress-egress-
>    aggregated states.  In this case all edges maintain one aggregated
>    state per each traffic class, i.e., PHB (Per Hop 
> Behaviour), used in
>    the PCN domain. Moreover, the HOSE model is able to 
> provide solutions
>    for the ECMP (Equal Cost Multi Path) problem for both admission
>    control and flow termination procedures.
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> Best regards,
> Georgios
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PCN mailing list
> PCN at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcn
> 
This e-mail and its contents are subject to the DISCLAIMER at http://www.tno.nl/disclaimer/email.html