[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Multi-AS needs : draft-zhang-mpls-interas-te-req-02.txt
>Why can't strict trans-as qos gaurentees be obtained today?
Because there is currently no scalable mechanism providing an optimal
placement of trans-as flows with QoS constraints.
This definitvely requires E2E Constraint Based Routing provided by
+ currently no FRR for inter-AS links and ASBRs
Thus the reason is IMHO clearly technical.
De : Jim Boyle [mailto:email@example.com]
Envoye : jeudi 6 mars 2003 20:48
A : LE ROUX Jean-Louis FTRD/DAC/LAN
Cc : firstname.lastname@example.org
Objet : RE: Multi-AS needs : draft-zhang-mpls-interas-te-req-02.txt
Why can't strict trans-as qos gaurentees be obtained today?
Is the reason technical or "other"?
On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, LE ROUX Jean-Louis FTRD/DAC/LAN wrote:
> Hi Jim and all
> >Scenario 4 looks right up our alley though. So I have to ask - what
> >current protocol specifications limits you from trying a few
> >approaches to Multi-AS TE?
> One of the various applications of inter-AS MPLS-TE is the
> of L2VPN services with PEs located in two distinct ASs.
> Typically such services have strict end-to-end QoS requirements that
> definitively not be ensured with current intra AS TE mechanisms.
> Indeed a combination of intra-AS TE deployment cannot provide e2e TE,
> e2e QoS, inter-AS link protection, ASBR protection,...
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Jim Boyle [mailto:email@example.com]
> Envoye : mardi 4 mars 2003 18:11
> A : firstname.lastname@example.org
> Objet : Multi-AS needs : draft-zhang-mpls-interas-te-req-02.txt
> It seems to me that there are a few different requirements in this
> taking a look at the scenarios in section 4, we have
> 1) Virtual POP - extend network through another's, place your
> edge router (PE) in someone elses POP w/o direct connectivity
> to your network.
> 2) Similar to 4.1, but in this case virtually extend your edge port
> onto another providers router (or all the way to customer).
> 3) CE to CE w/ QOS quarantees from multiple providers
> 4) Multi-AS TE within one Provider (e.g. global)
> 5) Extend one's network through another
> Scenarios 1-3 and 5 to me just seem to be inter-provider VPN
> (w/ a little QoS for flavor). So it seems the bulk of the discussion
> should happen elsewhere, right?
> Scenario 4 looks right up our alley though. So I have to ask - what
> current protocol specifications limits you from trying a few different
> approaches to Multi-AS TE?