Subject: [Sdn] SDN and Reinforced Concrete

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 15:51:56 +0530 (IST)

The industry has always been toying around with connection oriented and
connectionless. IP - Connectionless, TCP - Connection, MPLS/IP Connection,
Optical Networks - Connection, ASON - Connectionless Nature.
 While IP moves towards connectionless Optical is moving towards a
connection oriented nature.
 It is sort of like the uncertainty principle, if you are sure you are
going to be able to deliver a given traffic matrix, you are not sure when
 and if you hit a problem, you are going to completely loose the ability
to delvier (Connection), on the other hand, if your network is best
effort and connectionless you are not sure of the traffic demand matrix
that can be met more sure of delivery of what is possible when something
goes wrong.
  Connectionless enables sophisticated control that makes it easier to
(re)configure reachability for traffic, the control, [from the
operations perspective], but the forwarding itself is more more complex
(ip routing table lookups). In the Connection oriented the control [from
the network operations perspective] is more involved (there are less
automated algorithmic protocols doing the work for you) but the
forwarding is easier. Perhaps it is no wonder each is looking at the
other side as a greener pasture.
  SDN it appears could be the sweet spot.  The decoupling of the control
from the forwarding means that the connectionless-connection oriented
nature of the network itself could be configurabile! We have
configurability at the higher order....We now have configurability of
the configurability of the network. Does this have implications in the
kind of optimizations that are possible, surely, optimization
possibilities could be more powerful in a dynamic graph as opposed to a
less dynamic graph for any given traffic demand graph.  This is
something similar to Composites in the Materials world, SDN is perhaps
the Reinforced Concrete of the Civil Engineering world!
Sitaraman

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

---

From: Rana Sircar <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 17:29:58 +0530

Dear Sitaraman,

You have written so many things and drawn so many analogies, but somehow I
could not understand - call it my ignorance. I read your mail a couple of
times. I am sorry to say that I could not get the point you are trying to
make.

Can you summarize and be a bit more specific?

Best Regards,
Rana Pratap Sircar
GSM+919899003705|

On 23 January 2013 15:51, <[email-masked]> wrote:

> _______________________________________________
> sdn mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/sdn
>

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 17:38:11 +0530 (IST)

Hi Rana,
   Sorry about the confusion created...but i must admit cant help but be
fascinated by the interrelationships and the opportunties to
potentially borrow work done in one field to the other where possible.
   I was trying to bounce the thought that SDN architecture could
potentially be used to impart configurability of the
connection/connectionless nature of the network.
   To be specific let us say that a typically well behaved area of a
network is undergoing a weather turmoil or something similar, what was
connection oriented could temporarily be made connectionless, there may
be other such scenarios where this could be warranted.
Sitaraman