[Nsi-wg] Topology section

[Inder Monga]

Why not use mechanisms that are used in perfSONAR - a topology lookup 
service?

What are the pros and cons of that approach?

Inder

Jeroen van der Ham wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 16 May 2012, at 19:46, Jerry Sobieski wrote:
>> The key is that we are exchanging world views - or updates to world views, not simply local topologies.
>>
>> try this protocol sequence:
>> [...]
>
>
> Instead of thinking up all kinds of scenarios, and exchange mechanisms, could we just please restrain this to referring to other implementations?
>
> Most of what I've seen so far is all supported by OSPF. It has limited peering, abstraction, and simple update mechanisms. I propose we use that same mechanism, if there is anything that is wrong with that, please write what needs to be changed, and why.
>
> The only thing we don't have at our disposal is multicast, but I think we can solve that by using a peer-to-peer overlay network. That requires some bootstrapping, but you need to coordinate with your neighbor(s) already, so that can become part of that exchange too.
>
> Jeroen.
>
> _______________________________________________
> nsi-wg mailing list
> nsi-wg at ogf.org
> https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsi-wg

-- 
Inder Monga
510-486-6531
http://www.es.net
Follow us on Twitter: ESnetUpdates/Twitter <http://bit.ly/bisCAd>
Visit our blog: ESnetUpdates Blog 
<http://bit.ly/9lSTO3><http://bit.ly/d2Olql>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/nsi-wg/attachments/20120530/964c2bee/attachment.html>