IETF-60–SanDiegoPathComputationElement(PCE).pptVIP

 IETF- 60 – San DiegoPath Computation Element (PCE) BOFCo-chairs: JP Vasseur/Adrian FarrelADs: Alex Zinin/Bill Fenner? Requirements for PCE Based Path Computation Raymond Zhang - Infonet Requirements for PCE-based path computation KDDI Corporation Kenji Kumaki ke-kumaki@ 60th IETF PCE BOF@SanDiego Requirements for PCE-based path computation Multi-ASes, inter-SP environments Shortest end to end path For voice traffic Reoptimization for inter-AS TE LSPs If FRR acts, end to end path isn’t necessarily shortest path. Multi-IGP areas environments Scalability for inter-area TE LSPs Shortest end to end path For voice traffic Reoptimization for inter-area TE LSPs If FRR acts, end to end path isn’t necessarily shortest path. Why do we need a PCE-basedpath computation? Multi-ASes, inter-SP environments It is difficult to get a shortest end to end path through multi-ASes. Head-end router doesn’t have TE information about all of the links between Head-end and Tail-end. (Tail-end lies in a separate AS.) Multi-IGP areas environments We’d like to establish inter-area TE LSPs between many routers, but we face scalability issues because of routing and signaling overhead. It is difficult to get a shortest end to end path through multi-IGP areas. Head-end router doesn’t have TE information about all of the links between Head-end and Tail-end. (Tail-end lies in a separate area.) Motivations for PCE Based Path Computation J.L. Le Roux, France Telecom Head-End CSPF based computation Head-End CSPF based computation is sufficient in most cases for the placement of TE-LSPs On-demand independent path computation done by Head-End LSRs Simplicity, scalability, robustness However, there are some particular cases, where TE-LSP computation cannot rely on a Head-End CSPF based computation Some Complex routing problems requiring high CPU Memory consuming heuristics: Steiner tree computation for P2MP MPLS (NP-hard) Multi constraints path computation like e.g. bounded del