[Lsr] Questions about draft-ietf-lsr-dynamic-flooding-04

"Gengxuesong (Geng Xuesong)" <gengxuesong@huawei.com> Sat, 09 May 2020 06:25 UTC

Return-Path: <gengxuesong@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: lsr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lsr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA8703A080E for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 May 2020 23:25:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 32rG--FumO-v for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 May 2020 23:25:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B10F83A0809 for <lsr@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 May 2020 23:25:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhreml716-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown []) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 52D5B3D60597CD29222A for <lsr@ietf.org>; Sat, 9 May 2020 07:25:12 +0100 (IST)
Received: from nkgeml707-chm.china.huawei.com ( by lhreml716-chm.china.huawei.com ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.1913.5; Sat, 9 May 2020 07:25:11 +0100
Received: from dggeme752-chm.china.huawei.com ( by nkgeml707-chm.china.huawei.com ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256) id 15.1.1913.5; Sat, 9 May 2020 14:25:09 +0800
Received: from dggeme752-chm.china.huawei.com ([]) by dggeme752-chm.china.huawei.com ([]) with mapi id 15.01.1913.007; Sat, 9 May 2020 14:25:08 +0800
From: "Gengxuesong (Geng Xuesong)" <gengxuesong@huawei.com>
To: "tony.li@tony.li" <tony.li@tony.li>, "sarahchen@arista.com" <sarahchen@arista.com>
CC: "lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Lsr] Questions about draft-ietf-lsr-dynamic-flooding-04
Thread-Index: AdYlyowYbZl6t8IpSKWUsfFF00+SFQ==
Date: Sat, 9 May 2020 06:25:08 +0000
Message-ID: <28604621f41f45a5a6b870413c4318e0@huawei.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_28604621f41f45a5a6b870413c4318e0huaweicom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/DZEoLnl5IM5HXnWDMNl0lzHyoiY>
Subject: [Lsr] Questions about draft-ietf-lsr-dynamic-flooding-04
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: Sat, 09 May 2020 06:25:18 -0000

Hi Tony, Sarah

Thank you for your work about Flooding Reduction mechanism. I think it is very useful for IGP scalability.
When Sarah giving presentation for draft-chen-lsr-dynamic-flooding-algorithm-00 in LSR interim meeting, I raised a question about how to handle multipoint failure in the flooding topology. I remembered that draft-ietf-lsr-dynamic-flooding-04 was mentioned. I have read this draft, especially section 6.8.11 and temporary flooding relevant content. I think it is a valid method logically. (We have tried to raise some examples to challenge this method, but in all these cases, this method works) Considering that reliability of IGP is crucial for deployment, we are still wondering whether some mathematical proof is necessary (or possible) to guarantee that, in all the possible scenarios, proper convergence could be achieved when using flooding reduction algorithm, just as traditional IGP mechanism. The proof may be case by case depending on the flooding reduction algorithm, but we think even some example or clue about how to do this will be very helpful.

Best Regards