[179268] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Cisco's IOS-XE and PCEP implementation
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Rob Shakir)
Sun Apr 5 13:33:52 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Sun, 5 Apr 2015 18:33:46 +0100
From: Rob Shakir <rjs@rob.sh>
To: Mohamed Kamal <mkamal@noor.net>, NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <55196012.9050508@noor.net>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On 30 March 2015 at 15:42:59, Mohamed Kamal (mkamal=40noor.net) wrote:
> I'm wondering, why there is no MPLS-TE PCE support for IOS-XE till now=3F=
=21
> =20
> Should I be getting a 9k/CRS on the edge to implement an automatic tool=
> to build MPLS-TE tunnels=21
In general, PCE(P) implementations have been limited. IMHO the last 10 ye=
ars of RSVP-TE management has generally been done with auto-mesh tools, o=
r in-house driven offline path calculation tools (e.g., WANDL, Cariden, A=
ria=E2=80=A6).=C2=A0
As such, the demand for online calculation has increased - either due to =
dependencies for new TE path-instantiating protocols (e.g., SR), or more =
complex constraints that cannot be well met by offline calculation or CSP=
=46 (e.g., path-diversity with disjoint head-end PEs). This demand is mai=
nly coming in higher-scale environments - and hence being implemented on =
IOS-XR within the Cisco environment today. I expect this is why IOS-XE is=
lagging. There are certainly requests for support - but as Mark says, yo=
u=E2=80=99ll need to interface with your account team to figure out when =
code will be available for your platform.
As to whether you should buy an IOS XR device for your edge, I=E2=80=99m =
not sure what kind of logic would mean that device selection is solely ba=
sed on PCEP support :-). I would certainly look more into the existing =E2=
=80=9Cautomatic=E2=80=9D tools, and possibilities for offline calculation=
in the interim period.
r.
