Subject: Re: [i2rs] Architecture Discussion 5: Client Redundancy

From: KwangKoog Lee <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2013 18:14:20 +0900

Hi Alia. This is Kwang-koog from KT.

I checked many opinions from i2rs experts about the client redundancy.
Thanks for very meaningful discussion to more advance i2rs.

>From service provider perspective, active/standby operation of network
elements through dualization is mandatory for reliable operation from any
failure. So, I am welcoming for the addition of the client redundancy part.
Thank you.

Regarding to this, I ask you something for clarifying the understanding of
the i2rs architecture :-)

As seen in Figure 1 of the architure document, a network application has to
have a client? Or multiple network applications can attach to a single
client. Referring to Sec. 4, an I2RS client can interact with multiple
network applications. The next question is that network applications and
client can be physically separated?

Additionally, in Sec. 6.5 Connectivity, you state that "There are three
different assumptions that can apply to handling dead clients. The first is
that the network applicaions or management systems will detect a dead
network application and iether restart that network application ....".
Network applications can check the status of other network applications
each other? What is the management system? The first sentence is saying the
handling of dead clients, but the second sentence says the dead network
application. I want to cleary understand those matters.

Those might be simple questions for you. If so, appologize my lack of
comprehension :p
Thank you in advance and I also appreciate your efforts for i2rs.
Bye.

best regards,
Kwang-koog Lee

On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 11:59 PM, Alia Atlas <[email-masked]> wrote:

> In draft-ietf-i2rs-architecture-00 Sec 6.4.1:
>
> "I2RS must support client redundancy. At the simplest, this can be
>
>    handled by having a primary and a backup network application that
>    both use the same client identity and can successfully authenticate
>    as such.  Since I2RS does not require a continuous transport
>    connection and supports multiple transport sessions, this can provide
>    some basic redundancy.  However, it does not address concerns for
>
>    troubleshooting and accountability about knowing which network
>    application is actually active.  At a minimum, basic transport
>    information about each connection and time can be logged with the
>    identity.  Further discussion is necessary to determine whether
>    additional client identification information is necessary.[[Editor's
>    note: This requires more discussion in the working group.]]"
>
>
> I would like to start this discussion.  During and after the Berlin IETF, there
>
> was significant discussion on the list.  I tried to capture the ideas that were
>
> expressed then.  Is what is in the draft now sufficient?  How should it be improved
>
> upon?
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Alia (WG-Chair hat off)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> i2rs mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
>
>