Rare project developers

[Frédéric LOUI <>]

> @Frederic, is tomorrow freeRouter's meeting confirmed?
Of course ! IIRC, we have planned to have Csaba doing a RARE/freeRtr Polka 
demo …

So I strongly advise the UFES gang :) ton join us !


> Le 1 nov. 2021 à 22:30, Cristina Klippel Dominicini 
> <> a écrit :
> 
> Hi Csaba,
> 
> Thank you very much for your support. We are very happy with the fast 
> progress of the PolKA integration into freeRouter. We are now trying to 
> test and exploring your modifications in the freeRouter code to understand 
> how to contribute.
> @Frederic, is tomorrow freeRouter's meeting confirmed? I think it would be 
> a good opportunity to wrap up our current status and next steps.
> 
> Regarding the nodeIDs, in the Chinese Remainder Theorem, it is sufficient 
> if the nodeID polynomials are pairwise relatively prime (Section 17.4 of 
> https://shoup.net/ntb/ntb-v2.pdf). For simplicity purposes, we use 
> irreducible polynomials to assure this condition for any case (similar to 
> prime numbers in the integer arithmetic). Please, find attached an example 
> table of irreducible polynomials. I refactored the code and have just 
> submitted a new commit in the shared repository to include the computation 
> of nodeID polynomials with some examples (a random test and also a test 
> using the values from the ONDM paper). I added a simple code that tests all 
> the bit possibilities to generate a list of n irreducible polynomials of a 
> specific degree (for real scenarios, I believe the best approach is to 
> lookup a precomputed list of nodeids). Please let me know if this code 
> helps. We still have to produce more mature control plane functionalities 
> that explore these basic functions.
> 
> Regarding the design choices, the discussions with you, Frederic and Jordi, 
> were very helpful to tune our arguments about the potential benefits of 
> PolKA:
> - Tables: In the paper, one argument was that PolKA reduces the number of 
> states by not relying on tables. However, I agree with you that the use of 
> an almost static table to map the index of the next hops does not discredit 
> the original argument. Thus, your suggestion to use BGP/IGP for node 
> discovery and reuse the Segment Routing identifiers seems to be a very good 
> solution. We still reduce the management burden of maintaining routing 
> tables when compared with traditional approaches.
> - Header rewrite: In the paper, one argument was that PolKA does not need 
> to rewrite the routeid in the packet in each hop. However, I agree with you 
> that we need to rewrite at least a TTL field and ethernet address to 
> prevent loops and allow PolKA packets to traverse bridged networks, 
> respectively. Thus, I think we shouldn't focus on this argument.
> - Fixed header size: In the paper, we briefly show that PolKA's pipeline is 
> simpler to implement when compared to a list based approach, because it 
> does not need to operate over variable headers. As you said, this can be a 
> strong benefit considering the current hardware limitations in the maximum 
> number of hops for var header operations, as used in segment routing.
> 
> From your previous email:
>>> some more progess here, as you're carrying ethertype within polka header, 
>>> i added some mpls over polka test cases... so one can tunnel mpls vpns 
>>> (both layer2 and layer3) through a polka domain... 
>>> https://github.com/mc36/freeRouter/commit/aa261c3e3a5bf33f85e8068cf7555653f24c4e85
> Nice! We used the Ethernet header as a Proof of Concept, but we could 
> encapsulate the PolKA header in other protocols if you think it is more 
> adequate.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Cristina
> 
> ________________________________________
> De: mc36 <>
> Enviado: sábado, 30 de outubro de 2021 06:24
> Para: ; Frédéric LOUI
> Cc: Cristina Klippel Dominicini; Rafael Silva Guimarães; Moises R. N. 
> Ribeiro; Magnos Martinello
> Assunto: Re: [rare-dev] polka is approaching rare... was: Re: custom crc32 
> library in freerouter
> 
>> 
>> So basically Polka should be live and kicking in P4 LAB using RARE/freeRtr 
>> ?
>> 
>> PS: Please let me know if you need P4 dataplane and bf_forwarder.py to be 
>> upgraded.
>> 
> 
> so yeahhh, the freerouter upgrade does not carry (at the moment:) the 
> tofino.bin....
> so well the lab need a fresh bfrouter and bfforwarder... also, some 
> features needed
> to be taken out here because we ran out of stages... at my case it was 
> multicast,
> as it's a core (P) router here so no need for raw ip multicast, bier is 
> enough 4 me...
> attaching the constants table used to configure my stordis...
> 
> regards,
> cs
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> Esta mensagem (incluindo anexos) contém informação confidencial destinada a 
> um usuário específico e seu conteúdo é protegido por lei. Se você não é o 
> destinatário correto deve apagar esta mensagem.
> 
> O emitente desta mensagem é responsável por seu conteúdo e endereçamento.
> Cabe ao destinatário cuidar quanto ao tratamento adequado. A divulgação, 
> reprodução e/ou distribuição sem a devida autorização ou qualquer outra 
> ação sem conformidade com as normas internas do Ifes são proibidas e 
> passíveis de sanção disciplinar, cível e criminal.
> <poly.pdf>