[Nsi-wg] Encoding & Labeltype

[John MacAuley]

Sorry, I should have stated the actual A-GOLE requirements at this point.

1. There are networks that can do VID swapping.
2. There are networks that cannot do VID swapping.
3. There are networks that can do 802.1D-to-802.1Q encapsulation/decapsulation.

We need to be able to describe these is a simple and straight forward manner.

John

On 2013-11-07, at 10:31 AM, John MacAuley <john.macauley at surfnet.nl> wrote:

> I don't think it is silly, and there are use cases in the A-GOLE today so it is justified.
> 
> 1. Today we have no switching services defined so the definition is no label swapping on any ports and would be equivalent to having a switching service defined with all ports but label swapping set to false.  This means only like labels can be connected.  The question I have is if this is always the case, even when a switching service is defined.
> 
> 2. A switching service with no ports means it applies to all ports of that specific label type.
> 
> 3. When a switching service of a specific label type contains ports, it then means only those ports can be interconnected using that switching service.  I also assume that if label swapping is set to false then only like labels can be interconnected.
> 
> We have to be very careful in our drive for simplification that we do not oversimplify too much such that we have built a toy that can be used in very few scenarios.  I am committed to seeing this work in as simple a way as possible, however, Tomohiro already has use cases that are breaking the simplified NSI topology model.
> 
> John
> 
> On 2013-11-07, at 8:57 AM, Jerry Sobieski <jerry at nordu.net> wrote:
> 
>> I agree with Henrik.   This whole issue of trying to make different internal switching technologies evident is making things far more complex than there is any real use case to justify.
>> 
>> J
>> 
>> On 11/7/13 10:31 AM, Henrik Thostrup Jensen wrote:
>>> On Thu, 7 Nov 2013, Henrik Thostrup Jensen wrote:
>>> 
>>>>> The default behaviour is that if there is not a SwitchingService for a specific label type then only identical labels can be connected.  I think we need to extend that to the pair <encoding type, label type> must be identical otherwise an adaptation would be required to connect them.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Is that a bridge too far?
>>>> 
>>>> I think it sounds reasonable (with "I am not an NML expert" caveat).
>>> 
>>> On a site note:
>>> 
>>> I think the idea of listing ports on switching services is silly. It should just be a generic capability of the topology.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>   Best regards, Henrik
>>> 
>>> Henrik Thostrup Jensen <htj at nordu.net>
>>> Software Developer, NORDUnet
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nsi-wg mailing list
>>> nsi-wg at ogf.org
>>> https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsi-wg
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> nsi-wg mailing list
>> nsi-wg at ogf.org
>> https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsi-wg
> 
> _______________________________________________
> nsi-wg mailing list
> nsi-wg at ogf.org
> https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsi-wg