[166191] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: NANOG Digest, Vol 69, Issue 28
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Fred Reimer)
Fri Oct 11 14:55:15 2013
From: Fred Reimer <freimer@freimer.org>
To: Vytautas V Grigaliunas <vyto@fnal.gov>, "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 18:55:01 +0000
In-Reply-To: <ED6DC2C1A6D8774D8CB616278360334C03688D0A@MAIL01.fnal.gov>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Centralized management / control plane. Kind of the reverse of widely
dispersed per-node policy based routing.
On 10/11/13 2:47 PM, "Vytautas V Grigaliunas" <vyto@fnal.gov> wrote:
>What is SDN at its essence ?
>
>
>
>> Message: 9
>> Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 19:13:57 +0100 (BST)
>> From: William Waites <wwaites@tardis.ed.ac.uk>
>> To: joelja@bogus.com
>> Cc: nanog@nanog.org
>> Subject: Re: Policy-based routing is evil? Discuss.
>> Message-ID: <20131011.191357.239591912.wwaites@tardis.ed.ac.uk>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"us-ascii"
>>=20
>> On Fri, 11 Oct 2013 10:41:46 -0700, joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
>>said:
>>=20
>> > you take all the useful information that an IGP could be (or is)
>> > providing you, and then you ignore it and do something else.
>>=20
>> Yes, that's another part of the conversation, encouraging the use of an
>>IGP,
>> which has been a source of trouble for them because of broken wireless
>>bridges
>> from a very commonly used vendor that randomly eat multicast packets,
>>so it's
>> not as straightforward as it should be.
>>=20
>> > evil is not a synonym for ugly patch placed over a problem that
>> > could be handled better.
>>=20
>> Ok, fair enough. My first experience with PBR was as a summer intern in
>>the
>> mid-1990s who inherited management of a large ATM network that had a big
>> VPN-esque thing built entirely that way and with no documentation. It
>>certainly
>> felt evil at the time. ;)
>>=20
>> -w
>>=20
>> --
>> The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
>>Scotland, with
>> registration number SC005336.
>
