1 / 9

Control Models for Traffic Engineered Networks with Provider-Customer Relationship

This document aims to define the network scenario, compile terminology, identify problems, and provide a taxonomy of different control models for traffic-engineered networks with a provider-customer relationship. The goals and non-goals of the document are outlined, including the use of terminology and the categorization of control models.

nliles
Télécharger la présentation

Control Models for Traffic Engineered Networks with Provider-Customer Relationship

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Terminology and Models for Control of Traffic Engineered Networks with Provider-Customer Relationship CCAMP WG, IETF 89th, London draft-dios-ccamp-control-models-customer-provider-00 Oscar Gonzalez de Dios (ogondio@tid.es) Julien Meuric (julien.meuric@orange.com) Daniele Ceccarelli (daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com)

  2. Goals and Non-goals of the I-D • Define the network scenario • Compile terminology from Existing documents • Identify problems with terminology • Help to agree with terminology • Provide a taxonomy of the different control models • Non goals: Support a specific control model,

  3. Network Scenario • Interconnected network domains • At the data plane level • there is client-server relationship: “server” domain provides services to “client” domain • At control plane level • there is an administrative and policy boundary

  4. Terminology: Customer-Provider vs Client-Server • Client-server: • Pro: reflects the data plane relation • Con: does not reflect policy/administrative boundary • Customer-provider: • Pro: reflects policy/administrative boundary • Cons: • ITU semantic already defined in G.8080/Y.1304 • not used in RFC4208.

  5. Terminology: UNI • Interface between customer/client and provider/server domains • "User-to-Network Interface" (UNI) • However, the term has been used in multiple contexts and SDOs • ITU, OIF, IETF... • The exact definition and the associated functionalities depend on the application

  6. Terminology: Reachability • Reachability taxonomy from interconnected-te-info draft • Several variations • Unqualified Reachability • Qualified Reachability • Qualified Reachability with associated potential TE path

  7. Taxonomy of Control Models Signalling + requirements Signallingonly Signalling + collection Basicreachability Qualifiedreachability Qualified reachability+ associated TE-LSPs

  8. Taxonomy of Control Models • Signalling only • Signalling + requirements • customer can specify constraints • Signalling + collection • customer can receive information on service • Signalling + basic reachability • Signalling + qualified reachability • customer gets a priori provider’s information • Other models

  9. Next Steps • Receive feedback and comments from WG • Agree on terminology • client-server • customer-provider • X-Y? • Agree on Control Models Partionning

More Related