IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Lsr] Open issues with Dynamic Flooding

tony.li@tony.li Tue, 05 March 2019 21:23 UTC

Return-Path: <tony1athome@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: lsr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lsr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18A8A130E5F for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Mar 2019 13:23:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.881
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.881 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.018, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lWW0_lSaiVmf for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Mar 2019 13:23:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pg1-x531.google.com (mail-pg1-x531.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::531]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6523D130DCB for <lsr@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Mar 2019 13:23:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pg1-x531.google.com with SMTP id r124so6522935pgr.3 for <lsr@ietf.org>; Tue, 05 Mar 2019 13:23:36 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=3tOuko6NIrAkVNIBGwIOVnXBlcC3X0s99MMzswEZPIc=; b=cTsnOHCiRMfZjesNP/hpXknxaOmddSf+LKsytiPzS28Tux2tQaCvHbKrmIC6fF5+Rn GwzJJG/CH1esM/NuKETIKbPXWiZVyjbZsvxDq2HXc5zWGq+HwoYSQdc3iW7OSprJePdc n6eTQHznyW60/SmA9gi9DUzvg6mhsHdH+MxS3cTvtRjjDBp39iko0OECdRnWIA3Cvm+5 1WcjRR3rkAz+qgNz6KcwQgzXAs3yfQtUtyElAN4qKXwosfudXh7jVoSdUOl+FUqZujrJ 2tGGhclk3JcyUy2NRi4osdDd2dzy8T7TJH+S3rasqyn8wrL4lXUEMXgBxvhEpdEkMCxi c6rA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to :date:cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=3tOuko6NIrAkVNIBGwIOVnXBlcC3X0s99MMzswEZPIc=; b=hud21iDRS7oMy7immyRRoldCzynooSfr3LE3IfdmBLL2meHQ6+BgLncXR7OHM4VZbU IBBYU4aOkEG0AtaEK9b/ffg6DNlqMkjqLnOSgC8e8kf8Bw5oT9oQP8PoyGXlRSglwXxV qjKViku/Kr5kPmKadE1VLZ3Ek2tyaurqXyObzGs9sRAaDWIqWaEcuGzk5014hUFTTMQG 1Kb+aUq6BbFRrGkde+gvYKODfyQuyosBv+5JNllTXeEzCgffX7+tympxAtXmFG++SpQe v0/phTOWsWewcDn/ifm2cW3I5I/+pFp2qSs+atgvf0q15fh40U8ciQM4tPURlQ3yjZPT 0EhA==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXinAbiU3zHkHMx4UPxrp7IfwD9dRLckS0hGO0joe1T8Ek4eFak D/HxnakFfjCaQp/Kkq0Spjk=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwfahz37v524nT/2Txr/UZTcITTLUzT8SMOqa4FrXprujDCGVeZzpQG/a65m/VlQ8lykh1krQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a65:568b:: with SMTP id v11mr3272610pgs.23.1551821015847; Tue, 05 Mar 2019 13:23:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [172.22.228.48] ([162.210.130.3]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s6sm19344309pgm.90.2019.03.05.13.23.35 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 05 Mar 2019 13:23:35 -0800 (PST)
Sender: Tony Li <tony1athome@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.2 \(3445.102.3\))
From: tony.li@tony.li
In-Reply-To: <CAOj+MMG0m98A9ckWcrWDhAJPADy=Q=YfgMkez0JsF9H90wPjHw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2019 13:23:34 -0800
Cc: Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com>, Tony Przygienda <tonysietf@gmail.com>, lsr@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <7B8B4AEA-AB49-43D6-8ACC-69A77F0332EA@tony.li>
References: <AAD29CF0-F0CA-4C3C-B73A-78CD2573C446@tony.li> <c1adac3a-cd4b-130e-d225-a5f40bf0ef55@cisco.com> <F3C4B9B2-F101-4E28-8928-9208D5EBAF99@tony.li> <be28dbcf-8382-329a-229f-5b146538fabe@cisco.com> <CA+wi2hPt-UrekyA9LpCWJHo9KyaOR1=eVQD29y54sciv3zh10A@mail.gmail.com> <CAOj+MMGPp=DffEw7vS4PH_vDtmYL5y2Xxgx2utNt4R6cxsCiwg@mail.gmail.com> <41bd7097-0d25-a2e0-843d-cb25fd13a84f@cisco.com> <CAOj+MMHmi-Ch43=YJ=LphPxiJmoHyg1fovqnT5iJxB6ASPfUXQ@mail.gmail.com> <f1888bd8-e54e-2a3b-57a4-a05c632c6c7e@cisco.com> <CAOj+MMG0m98A9ckWcrWDhAJPADy=Q=YfgMkez0JsF9H90wPjHw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.102.3)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/-31bDYtaDF75qPfYKPBGEim2wEg>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] Open issues with Dynamic Flooding
X-BeenThere: lsr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Link State Routing Working Group <lsr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lsr>, <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lsr/>
List-Post: <mailto:lsr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr>, <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2019 21:23:38 -0000


> Is that really a common agreement in the WG ? I have a feeling think this is too restrictive for no valid technical reason. 


Well, it’s been the requirement that has been unchallenged since we started this journey.

The technical reason for this is clear: if too much flooding is hurting you and we need bi-connectivity to protect against failures, then adding more connectivity seems like it negates the benefits of the restricted topology.

I should note that for many topologies and for many nodes, being just bi-connected will not be possible.  In any interesting LS network, for example, where # leaves >> # spines, the spines will still have many active connections in the FT.  While having leaves with 4 or 6 connections is certainly possible, it seems inadvisable.

Tony

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email