Global Lambda Integrated Facility

Re: [GLIF tech] Why do we need topology exchange?

  • Subject: Re: [GLIF tech] Why do we need topology exchange?
  • From: Victor Reijs <victor.reijs@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2010 14:19:54 +0100

Hello John and Freek,

John Vollbrecht wrote:
The rest of topology I am not sure about.  I would think it a good thing, but I also think it would take a lot of work and be hard to maintain.  Is this what you mean?

In some way I like the idea we had in AutoBAHN: an abstracted topology to determine the path. An abstracted topology does not hold much detail just enough to determine the possible path (I am see this as with human: when they talk about a project they more or less have the physical connectivity in their had.
The next step is are higher network protocol levels compatible.
This is the very first part of path finding (the net graph, which can be in one or two stages).
And than can we make them work (Stitching Framework).
And then implement it (Signaling).

So A full topology is not needed in my humble opinion, but an abstract (at least see a domain as a node).

All the best,


HEAnet National Networking Conference, 10-12 November 2010
Registration is now open at:

Victor Reijs, Network Development Manager
HEAnet Limited, Ireland's Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin 1
Registered in Ireland, no 275301
tel: +353-1-660 9040  fax: +353-1-660 3666