IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call for draft-li-lsr-dynamic-flooding-02 + IPR poll.

Tony Li <tony1athome@gmail.com> Mon, 25 February 2019 03:40 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 93EDF12D4F0; Sun, 24 Feb 2019 19:40:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 wjTbQEkMRnTk; Sun, 24 Feb 2019 19:40:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pf1-x434.google.com (mail-pf1-x434.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::434]) (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 E449E130EC6; Sun, 24 Feb 2019 19:40:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pf1-x434.google.com with SMTP id g6so3784808pfh.13; Sun, 24 Feb 2019 19:40:18 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=qMDfJ9tvTCU+yPUwaS9g4f+poHj5TaamHiaBJptm3hY=; b=XXeeOz/wBci71SxmJc3RTrVCaT46btP8IfmkRtafm7sOb5ma9sY1OOEeAEpq7a1+sZ 8UYY6uvTQKFHiuza9BcvG6MZxhVNv2bGhyxGzzxkJ87piilpOanof8Ag3dCaIjlrDWBZ e/c3EubHYGd1MbAAQTAElWqNQaqU03NXm4D1bYS1wa6qt1YumCU/qosyjl2wk+x9xEH0 phHiKa7Z+ZtTvYIgLVNxRQy+yxm2vjUjkJMfirDrred5WWHVi0wcvlFoNg8T4qIXhBYL 6P+247VUpm1JiRwGBDfRn13o0F+U3tmT+6kODwc8Qbi4GZcablXJw1MVJCivmtPA9sF/ J5/g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=qMDfJ9tvTCU+yPUwaS9g4f+poHj5TaamHiaBJptm3hY=; b=eFFv4Lrd+sy+TYBICUhj3fbg43r0IZRc3OU32Zi0j6qrbcS9h+rR6CQqflPBZuTk/W ZQojaTQpfGNdObQ8jtKb8DZySC6e8wBMJuTBg+3N4PnOxEf6aof/PAB7L+ENwkOGnqjj ujJe682D00YIwxJ8aDwvPePvKM5vh7sJadm+T4qyWTT0FPJkXxjNv3rWbivzdqLyIb3l vdadzAhMu/zaCDag1lzNfeyddkxgtA9+ELVml+CsCI1FApdjvqdzXuIXsay+eu4En2sI VtHLhcNPiJ/XzCTvne0Isgf9M44IjX8PDTKBp/uhV89t59taOv7oqjP3Lm6f9Rrr/g/J ZYOg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuatEhQNrJA0KA2Nrl2FqJIcmpGX+TY2FlR1+93NQWDu6EXhCMlE 8yQoxRfSCS91c9Y7FqNVgxk=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IYE6KUQnafxhFwvqjGw1p7TT/dtcpbH7Jh6mgP2MG7Yiuq0GfJ7CT92HZuRnNfc1NkEU3R4Cg==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:6e02:: with SMTP id j2mr16340320pgc.229.1551066018147; Sun, 24 Feb 2019 19:40:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.5] (c-73-158-115-137.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [73.158.115.137]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y6sm4202220pfy.87.2019.02.24.19.40.17 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 24 Feb 2019 19:40:17 -0800 (PST)
From: Tony Li <tony1athome@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <3EB15670-A8B1-41AA-8545-0EB7E82ED02D@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_D0F4D203-9811-4DBF-9708-F1C74D9F6380"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.2 \(3445.102.3\))
Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2019 19:40:16 -0800
In-Reply-To: <sa6pnrglqyj.fsf@chopps.org>
Cc: Peter Psenak <ppsenak@cisco.com>, Huaimo Chen <huaimo.chen@huawei.com>, "lsr-ads@ietf.org" <lsr-ads@ietf.org>, "lsr-chairs@ietf.org" <lsr-chairs@ietf.org>, "lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>
To: Christian Hopps <chopps@chopps.org>
References: <sa6lg2md2ok.fsf@chopps.org> <SN6PR11MB284553735B2351FB584BE792C17F0@SN6PR11MB2845.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <5316A0AB3C851246A7CA5758973207D463B5858A@sjceml521-mbx.china.huawei.com> <420ed1b5-d849-99cc-bcb0-d159783e4de2@cisco.com> <sa6pnrglqyj.fsf@chopps.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.102.3)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/4XKMoChtxENryHr8Wtc76hrDOiQ>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call for draft-li-lsr-dynamic-flooding-02 + IPR poll.
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, 25 Feb 2019 03:40:21 -0000


> On Feb 24, 2019, at 3:14 PM, Christian Hopps <chopps@chopps.org> wrote:
> 
>>  In distributed mode the area leader is
>> the one that advertises the algorithm that is used by all nodes that
>> participates in dynamic flooding.
> 
> I'd like to suggest that as this point is discussed we are careful to not try and replace the standard configuration mechanisms.


I appreciate the suggestion. The concern is that configuration of the algorithm selection is extremely challenging.  Suppose that
an administrator wishes to change algorithms.  If manual, individual configuration is the only possible way, then the network is
at risk while the configuration is in progress. At scale, this seemed inadvisable.  A clear, signaled change seemed like a clean and
simple synchronization point.

Tony

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email