[Lsr] Clarification on co-existance of dynamic flooding aware and not aware nodes

[Robert Raszuk <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

My reading of draft-ietf-lsr-dynamic-flooding indicates that said document
in number of places rather assumes that entire topology (entire instance)
supports dynamic flooding (perhaps other then bootstrap phase).

Let's observe that there can be lots of L3 TORs only dual attached to
access routers which will not benefit at all to be part of the game.
Moreover those TORs may be from different vendors and could support link
state protocols without any dynamic flooding extensions.

So the question is if the proposal considers a case where only part of the
fabric in single topology, single area/level, single LSDB etc. is aware
about dynamic flooding protocol extensions ?

Let's also observe that In any deployment such state when some nodes are
enabled and some not for dynamic flooding can happen during migrating phase
or operator's errors which one would assumed must be handled correctly by
the protocol.

Many thx,
R.