Rather than my trying to restate the problem, I would recommend reading Sent
via the Samsung Galaxy S20 FE 5G, an AT&T 5G smartphone
-------- Original message --------From: Yisong Liu <[email protected]>
Date: 12/11/24 1:23 AM (GMT-05:00) To: Joel Halpern <[email protected]>,
spring <[email protected]> Cc: draft-liu-spring-sr-policy-flexible-path-selection
<[email protected]> Subject: Re： Re:
[spring] Ask SPRING WG for review
draft-liu-spring-sr-policy-flexible-path-selection Hi Joel,Thank you for your
comments. I want to provide some clarity regarding the purpose and scope of
this draft . This draft tackles the scenario where multiple paths are
available, and the need arises to switch paths based on their quality metrics.
It is not intended to replace the controller's role in global optimization but
rather to complement it by allowing for local, quality-driven responses to link
degradation.The draft specifically addresses the ability to switch to
alternative paths within a strategy when the current path fails to meet
specified link quality criteria such as bandwidth, delay, or packet loss. In
cases where a controller issues an SR Policy that encompasses multiple paths,
if a path's link quality does not meet the set requirements, it will switch to
a backup path for forwarding.Essentially, this draft resolves the forwarding
status of SR Policy paths, facilitating a switch based on link quality. It is
important to note that the overall path optimization remains under the purview
of the controller, which continues to make global decisions. This draft
addresses the selection issue of multiple paths under an SR Policy, ensuring
that the network can adapt to local conditions without overriding the
controller's broader strategies.I'm not sure if I've explained everything
clearly. If you have any further questions, please feel free to continue the
discussion.
Best RegardsYisong 发件人: Joel Halpern时间: 2024/12/09(星期一)11:45收件人: Yisong
Liu;spring;抄送人: draft-liu-spring-sr-policy-flexible-path-selection;主题: Re:
[spring] Ask SPRING WG for review
draft-liu-spring-sr-policy-flexible-path-selection
Looking at this draft, there seem to be two related aspects, one
of which makes sense, and one of which needs work.
As a participant, I can understand the general goal. And
adjusting the path selection when component link issues reduce the
overall available bandwidth, increase the end-to-end delay, or
increase the expected jitter is understandable. I leave whether
this is the right approach to that problem to those who have
worked more closely with SR policies.
However, if I read section 4.1 properly, it wants to change the
path selection in response to observed parameters such as observed
packet loss (frequently in practice caused by congestion.) On
fortunately, distributed dynamic path selection based on
parameters that are sensitive to traffic load has well-known
problems with various responders adjusting resulting in simply
moving the problem. If you have recognized this problem and I
missed it, please cite RFC 2386 early in the document, and point
to the resolution. If you have not addressed this problem, please
either do so or restrict the applicability of this proposal.
Delaying response is not sufficient.
Yours,
Joel
On 12/8/2024 9:37 PM, Yisong Liu wrote:
Dear WG members,
With
the rise of AI models, new intelligent computing services
require enhanced network reliability, especially in
quality-sensitive scenarios like storage-compute
separation and real-time inference. The
draft-liu-spring-sr-policy-flexible-path-selection offers
flexible path switching for quality degradation, crucial
for maintaining network performance.
This
draft proposed a
new mechanism to specify multiple candidate paths for SR
policies, allowing for more sophisticated traffic
engineering. It supports
dynamic path adjustments based on real-time network
conditions, optimizing resource utilization and ensuring
high service quality. This draft aims to provide network
operators with greater flexibility and control over
traffic routing in SR networks.
We
have just posted a new version. Please see the draft in
the following link:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-liu-spring-sr-policy-flexible-path-selection/
I
hope you can review this draft and share your feedback.
Welcome any questions and comments.
Best Regards
Yisong on behalf of co-authors
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
