Opened 7 years ago

Last modified 7 years ago

#9 new enhancement

Do we need to model transport constraints between sites ?

Reported by: stephane.litkowski@… Owned by: draft-ietf-l3sm-l3vpn-service-model@…
Priority: minor Milestone: milestone1
Component: l3vpn-service-model Version: 2.0
Severity: Active WG Document Keywords:
Cc:

Description

In some cases, customer are requesting specific transport between their site (for example : low latency path between two specific sites, disjoint paths between pair of hub sites ...).

Do we need to model it ?

Change History (3)

comment:1 follow-up: Changed 7 years ago by michael.scharf@…

I think that would be useful input to the SDN controller realizing the connectivity.

The key question is if there is a simple and abstract way to model those customer requirements. It is relatively simply to model constraints for the L3VPN as a whole (e.g., that all sites should be connected with lowest possible latency), but for connectivity between specific sites an abstract specification could be a bit more challenging.

Michael

comment:2 in reply to: ↑ 1 Changed 7 years ago by sunseawq@…

To model transport constraints, there are two proposals on the table:
Now regarding modeling of the transport constraint, I do not see a real sexy way for now.

Proposal #1 :

Create a transport-constraint container within the vpn-svc to describe the constraints. Example :

rw vpn-svc

+--rw transport-constraint

+--rw list [id]

+--rw id uint32
+--rw src-site leafref
+--rw dst-site leafref
+--rw constraint-type identityref
+--rw constraint-value ???

=> constraint-value may have a variable type depending of the constraint-type, for example, expressing latency boundary, or disjointness group ...

Proposal#2 :

Put the constraint in the site

rw site

+--rw services

+--rw transport-constraint

+--rw dst-site-list [dst-site]

+--rw dst-site leafref
+--rw constraint-type identityref
+--rw constraint-value ???

Thoughts ?

You also can review these two proposal from the following link:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/l3sm/qakWoaP0lt_HMNZFkDoNOctMOyw

Replying to michael.scharf@…:

I think that would be useful input to the SDN controller realizing the connectivity.

The key question is if there is a simple and abstract way to model those customer requirements. It is relatively simply to model constraints for the L3VPN as a whole (e.g., that all sites should be connected with lowest possible latency), but for connectivity between specific sites an abstract specification could be a bit more challenging.

Michael

comment:3 Changed 7 years ago by bill.wu@…

  • Component changed from draft-ltsd-l3sm-l3vpn-service-model to l3vpn-service-model
  • Milestone set to milestone1
  • Owner changed from draft-ltsd-l3sm-l3vpn-service-model@… to draft-ietf-l3sm-l3vpn-service-model@…
  • Severity changed from - to Active WG Document
  • Version set to 2.0
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.