Toerless Eckert <[email protected]> wrote: > The google incident is exactly solved by ACP: The ACP is absent of any > configuration. Therefore also absent of any misconfiguration.
> The magic of resilience lies in the correct layering. In the best of
> implementation designs, the whole ACP implementation on a node is
> running on resources that nobody can misconfigure and any user traffic
> and contrl plane configuration does not touch it.
Right, so in keeping this thought, is the WG interested in designing a
way to interact with L2 switches?
In my experience, 90% of mis-configuration issues are due to L2 switch
issues.
(I think that it's because there is no "traceroute" or "ping" which
works at L2, and so it's really hard to diagnose/determine if one did the
right thing.)
My current idea is to attempt to prototype this in DPDK, but not really any
point if nobody cares about this.
Name: draft-richardson-anima-l2-friendly-acp
was about to expire, so I have reposted it.
Html:
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-richardson-anima-l2-friendly-acp-01.html
Diff:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-richardson-anima-l2-friendly-acp-01
Abstract:
This document details the challenges with building an Autonomic
Control Plane on Campus/Enterprise networks which are built out of
layer-two (Ethernet) switched technologies.
This document does not propose a specific solution as yet, but
details a number of possibilities, and what it would take to
standardize each possibility.
--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Anima mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
