Hi Gyan,

let me comment on the flex-algo aspect. Please see inline:

On 30/03/2020 23:50, Gyan Mishra wrote:

Does SRv6 support SR-TE and flex Alg?

yes, it does support both.



Since SRv6 supports native traffic steering with SRH with end prefix sid and end.x adjacency sid you can achieve the basic steering and ECMP capability with prefix sid lose or strict hop by hop with every node specified in SRH SL.

I want to confirm that SRv6 fully supports all of the  SR-TE capabilities available with SR-MPLS with static lose or strict paths and coloring of vpn flows.

From the SR policy draft I did see that section 4 lists segment types and does appear to support SRv6 sid.

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy-06


    4
    
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy-06#section-4>.
    Segment Types



    A Segment-List is an ordered set of segments represented as <S1, S2,
    ... Sn> where S1 is the first segment.

    Based on the desired dataplane, either the MPLS label stack or the
    SRv6 SRH is built from the Segment-List.  However, the Segment-List
    itself can be specified using different segment-descriptor types and
    the following are currently defined:


Flex Alg - SRv6 support?

yes.


Flex Alg is orthogonal to SR TE as it provides IGP extensions for constrained SPF versus traditional RSVP or SR-TE providing the extensions for cSPF - basically another method of steering which as well is very powerful tool for operators.

It does appear SRv6 supports flex Alg draft below.

yes.


https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo-06

Abstract

IGP protocols traditionally compute best paths over the network based
    on the IGP metric assigned to the links.  Many network deployments
    use RSVP-TE based or Segment Routing based Traffic Engineering to
    enforce traffic over a path that is computed using different metrics
    or constraints than the shortest IGP path.  This document proposes a
    solution that allows IGPs themselves to compute constraint based
    paths over the network.  This document also specifies a way of using
    Segment Routing (SR) Prefix-SIDs and SRv6 locators to steer packets
    along the constraint-based paths.



What are the benefits of using SR-TE over flex Alg and vice versa?

you can think of them as different tools in your SR-TE tool set. You pick them as you need them. They can be used independently in parallel or can even be combined together to give you even more flexibility.

The principal difference is that SR-TE provisions point-to-point path(s) between two end-points, while flex-algo provides any to any paths between set of participating nodes.


Also can SR-TE use flex Alg steered paths as the dynamic cSPF paths?

yes


Can SR-TE use and specify flex Alg to be used for traffic steering?

yes

thanks,
Peter



Kind regards


Gyan
Verizon
Cell 301 502-1347
--

Gyan  Mishra

Network Engineering & Technology

Verizon

Silver Spring, MD 20904

Phone: 301 502-1347

Email: gyan.s.mis...@verizon.com <mailto:gyan.s.mis...@verizon.com>




_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
spring@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring

Reply via email to