Editor's Note: Minutes received 12/1/92 CURRENT_MEETING_REPORT_ Reported by Marco E. Sosa/Bellcore Minutes of the Virtual Circuit Routing BOF (VCROUT) The meeting was organized as a BOF to determine if there was enough interest in forming an IETF working group to develop a standard routing algorithm for choosing paths for virtual connection set-up in a Frame Relay or ATM network. The meeting was attended by more than 48 people. The meeting was a presentation led by Rob Coltun covering the issues discussed at a previous meeting. Audience feedback/discussion on the scope of issues addressed was encouraged and received. (So much so that we didn't even get through the summary of the previous meeting's outcomes.) The talk included: o Scope of the proposed working group. o Initial set of issues/plan of attack discussed at previous meeting. In addition, Juha Heinanen presented his proposal for integrated routing using NSAP addressing. After much discussion the Group decided that there was enough interest that a IETF working group should be formed. A mailing list has already been set up at vc-routing@gated.cornell.edu. Please use vc-routing-request@gated.cornell.edu to join. The following topics were addressed: o Rob and Marco Sosa (Bellcore) will co-Chair the Working Group and edit the resulting specification (standards-track RFC?). o Rob and Marco will co-author an (informational) Internet-Draft, before the next IETF, which will outline the envisioned scope and architecture for which the resulting specification will apply, including what we think are the major issues to resolve. This will incorporate any input received from the mailing list. o The resulting specification should be based on existing standards/ implementation agreements. OSPF/RMP is one of the starting points for our proposal (RMP is an OSPF-based protocol used in multi-switch SMDS networks). o The work of this Group should not duplicate the work that is being done in other standard groups/forums. o The initial focus of the Group should be within a single routing 1 domain (Autonomous System) with up to 1000 switches. Inter-domain routing issues will also be looked into, possibly based on IDRP. o We will specify the routing protocol used between switches in the routing domain. A switch may in fact be distributed, running proprietary protocols internally. o What address resolution is performed by attached end-systems (and how), is a hot topic that can not be decided by this Group. However, it may be appropriate to specify a means of resolving the addresses received within a call set-up message into a network internal switch/ port identifier to be used by the routing protocol. o Q.933 (FR)/Q.93B (ATM) signaling will be base for virtual circuit management work. The Group will look into extending these as needed to define an inter-switch call set-up protocol (algorithm and format) that will include an option for inter-domain and inter-domain (loose) source route call set-up. o Alternative methods for the format of the switch identifiers were discussed. Using a private 32-bit address (which could be an IP address) to ID a switch or using variable-length public NSAPs to identify end stations attached to a switch and routing based on these were the two main options. o Assignment of link metrics was discussed. There seemed to be agreement that metrics should be settable through administration. There is also a proposal to define default metrics to provide a consistent metric all switches could handle (as metrics may change dynamically). The proposal is to look into using the SMDS RMP default metrics as the base. Modifications are needed to base the metric on ``unreserved effective BW'' rather than capacity. Effective BW allows for over-reservation of links and leaves open possibility of a better traffic descriptor than peak rate or CIR. Also, ``damping'' procedures will be needed to make sure excessive LSAs are not sent (don't want new LSA every time a new connection is reserved over a link). o Three different classes of service were discussed, VC, Datagram, and ``Soft VC'' (like VC but without strict QOS guarantees, possibly allowing simpler call rerouting). The co-Chairs will create a draft Charter based on the agreements of the two meetings. Attendees Cynthia Bagwell cbagwell@gateway.mitre.org Fred Baker fbaker@acc.com Ken Benstead kbenstead@coral.com 2 Lou Berger lberger@bbn.com Shiraz Bhanji bhanji@gateway.mitre.org Edo Biagioni esb@fore.com Ken Carlberg Carlberg@cseic.saic.com Kay Chang chang@chang.austin.ibm.com Dilip Chatwani dilip@synoptics.com Dean Cheng dean@sun2.retix.com Chi Chong cchong@synoptics.com George Clapp clapp@ameris.center.il.ameritech.com Robert Cole rgc@qsun.att.com Osmund de Souza osmund.desouza@att.com Art Dertke dertke@gateway.mitre.org Jacques Dugast dugast@issy.cnet.fr Robert Enger enger@reston.ans.net Mike Goguen goguen@src.dec.com Patrick Hanel hanel@yoyodyne.dco.ntc.nokia.com Ken Hayward crm57d@bnr.ca Frank Heath heath@cmc.com David Husak dave@synnet.com David Jacobson dnjake@vnet.ibm.com Merike Kaeo merike@alw.nih.gov George Kajos kajos@coral.com Fong-Ching Liaw fong@eng.sun.com Olli-Pekka Lintula olli-pekka.lintula@ntc.nokia.com Robin Littlefield rlittlef@wellfleet.com Andrew Malis malis@bbn.com Tracy Mallory tracym@3com.com Robert Moose rmoose@gateway.mitre.org Julianne Myers jmyers@network.com Erik Nordmark nordmark@eng.sun.com Bala Rajagopalan braja@qsun.att.com Jim Scott scott@kali.enet.dec.com Frank Solensky solensky@andr.ub.com Marco Sosa mxs@sabre.bellcore.com Brad Steinka brad@microcom.com Terrance Sullivan terrys@newbridge.com John Tavs tavs@vnet.ibm.com Dono van-Mierop dono_van_mierop@3mail.3com.com James Watt james@newbridge.com Luanne Waul luanne@wwtc.timeplex.com Guy Wells guy2@uswest.com Ian Wilson ianw@spider.co.uk Liang Wu ltw99@bellcore.com 3