1 / 7

TRILL Routing Requirements

TRILL Routing Requirements. Currently draft-gray-rbridge-routing-reqs-00. Assumptions. RBridge Architectural Model remains the same as in draft-perlman-rbridge-03 ( RBridges: Transparent Routing, Radia Perlman, Joe Touch and Alper Yegin, May 2005 ) Allow for zero configuration

anitaa
Download Presentation

TRILL Routing Requirements

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. TRILL Routing Requirements Currently draft-gray-rbridge-routing-reqs-00

  2. Assumptions • RBridge Architectural Model remains the same as in draft-perlman-rbridge-03 (RBridges: Transparent Routing, Radia Perlman, Joe Touch and Alper Yegin, May 2005) • Allow for zero configuration • Optimal, campus-scope pair-wise (RBridge – RBridge) routing • Short-term loop mitigation • VLAN support • Using existing routing protocols (IS-IS emphasized for now) • Miscellaneous other (hopefully minor) assumptions

  3. Document Content and Structure • Content primarily from draft-perlman-rbridge-03 with some input from others and from the list. • Structured (beyond template requirements) to include: • Requirements for link state routing protocol support • Issues – • Interactions with STP and spanning tree forwarding • RBridge interactions with routing • Conclusions • Usual Introduction, Security Considerations, References, Acknowledgements, blah, blah.

  4. Input Since Submission • Lots of mailing list input on STP and spanning tree forwarding interactions • Specific wording suggestions • Dialogue on possible changes to the model • Additional references to include

  5. Seeking Further Input/Guidance • Several sections are TBD at present: • Determine what model(s) we will support for the numbers of spanning trees (there is still a lot of unresolved discussion on this) • Work out the “conclusions” of the document • Review, comment and suggest text for remainder of the document – please!

  6. To do… • Add IANA considerations (likely template requirement – even if there are none) • Rev with input to date (waiting until after the meeting) • Continue discussions – mostly on the list – of models, references, suggested content. • Add to Acknowledgements and Reference sections. • Determine at what point this should become a WG document…

  7. Conclusion • Thanks!

More Related