[Lsr] Flooding Reduction Draft Discussion - a naive question

"Susan Hares" <shares@ndzh.com> Mon, 11 February 2019 18:09 UTC

Return-Path: <shares@ndzh.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 C6DA6130E9D for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Feb 2019 10:09:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.947
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.947 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DOS_OUTLOOK_TO_MX=2.845, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 NHvCWHmfH4bD for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Feb 2019 10:09:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from hickoryhill-consulting.com (50-245-122-100-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [50.245.122.100]) (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 102E01310E2 for <lsr@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Feb 2019 10:09:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Default-Received-SPF: pass (skip=loggedin (res=PASS)) x-ip-name=166.176.248.72;
From: Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>
To: lsr@ietf.org
Cc: 'Tony Li' <tony1athome@gmail.com>, 'Zhenbin Li' <lizhenbin@huawei.com>, 'Huaimo Chen' <huaimo.chen@huawei.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2019 13:09:35 -0500
Message-ID: <019801d4c234$f3142a60$d93c7f20$@ndzh.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0199_01D4C20B.0A3EBEA0"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AdTCMnixMRdd3byjQ1iUo+7ltqHGQQ==
Content-Language: en-us
X-Antivirus: AVG (VPS 190211-6, 02/11/2019), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Not-Tested
X-Authenticated-User: skh@ndzh.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/-9nUQDg4cMVtaWMzOICfUVV2FxA>
Subject: [Lsr] Flooding Reduction Draft Discussion - a naive question
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: Mon, 11 Feb 2019 18:09:45 -0000

In working through the emails on the flooding reduction concepts,  I have a
few question:   Is this work is simply for the spine-leaf topologies or for
multiple topologies?   . Does this work consider all of the following
networks: spine-leaf data centers, 802.1 Provider Bridging, IPRAN
topologies, banking networks, and IoT sensor networks?  

 

If this technology is for multiple topologies, it is useful to have a
discussion of convergence problems within these diverse networks.   I have
observed in WG meetings and on-list the following problem scenarios: a)
spine-leaf convergence problem descriptions and b) Dave Allan's description
of the 802.1 Provider Bridging (PBB) convergence issues.   Did I miss other
problem convergence discussions?  

 

Sue

 

PS -  As part of some research for IPRAN topologies, I wrote-up a
description of convergence problems for the IPRAN ring-grid topologies.  I
am looking for something like: 

https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hares-lsr-grid-ring-convergence-0
0.txt