On Mar 10, 2012, at 3:25 AM, 杨术 wrote: > Hi, Fred Baker, > > Thanks for your advices. > > We have discussed your draft in our group meeting, because your > draft is strongly related with two dimensional routing. Your draft > illustrates detaiedly that how to devise a new protocol, that can make > forwarding decisions based on destination and source addresses.
It also explicitly mentions DSCP as an option, and in homenet discussion (might have been offline, I don't remember), Brian Carpenter suggested flow label (although I think that would differ from the random number his current document puts into it). Yes, it has overlaps. > Our draft differs from yours in that: > 1. We try to illustrate the huge benefits from deploying two dimensional > routing, that makes forwarding decisions based on both destination and > source addresses. The network will be more flexible if routers can divert > traffic based on source address. Thus, policy routing, traffic engineering, > path/link protection, multi-path, multi-homing can be achieved more easily. > For example, with two dimensional routing, we can express "deliver traffic > from source A towards destination B to router C" explicitly and easily. > 2. We focus on the architecture of two dimensional routing. We try to > properly > divide the whole routing system into several components, and point out how > to devise each component to achieve efficiency and consistency. > > 3. We have designed a new forwarding table structure called FIST, and we are > developing it based on a commercial router. With one more address to lookup > during routing, we believe that the FIB is a key component considering > scalability > issues. FIST is different with previous FIB structure in that, 1) it has two > TCAMs, > one stores destination prefixes, the other stores source prefixes; 2) in > SRAM, > there is a two dimensional table that stores the next hop information. Such > that > we can achieve fast lookup speed, and avoid explosion problem in TCAM. That's one implementation approach, and it sounds like it has value. While most routers have some concept of a forwarding information base, the IETF has never particularly commented on how the FIB was structured. That has been viewed as a competitive angle - different implementations might do it different ways with different effects. The last discussion I recall about FIB design was a BOF at IETF 14 or 15 led by Craig Partridge. When I started working to regularize this, folks back at *my* ranch told me that I was re-inventing Multi-Topology Routing. > Shu Yang > > > > On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 10:33 PM, Fred Baker <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mar 8, 2012, at 12:02 AM, 杨术 wrote: > >> Dear all, >> >> We are looking for your comments on the new draft "Two Dimensional IP >> Routing Architecture". >> >> This document describes Two Dimensional IP (TwoD-IP) routing, a new >> Internet routing architecture which makes forwarding decisions based >> on both source address and destination address. This presents a >> fundamental extension from the current Internet, which makes >> forwarding decisions based on the destination address, and provides >> shortest single-path routing towards destination. Such extension >> provides rooms to solve fundamental problems of the past and foster >> great innovations in the future. >> We present the TwoD-IP routing framework and its two underpinning >> schemes. The first is a new hardware-based forwarding table >> structure for TwoD-IP, FIST, which achieves line-speed lookup with >> acceptable storage space. The second is a policy routing protocol >> that flexibly diverts traffic. >> >> We plan to give a presentation on this in the upcoming IETF83. The >> draft can be found at >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xu-rtgwg-twod-ip-routing-00. >> >> We would really appreciate any comments and questions about the >> document. > > My first suggestion would be to compare/contrast with > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-baker-fun-routing-class >
_______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
