IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Lsr] Thoughts on the area proxy and flood reflector drafts.

tony.li@tony.li Wed, 10 June 2020 17:23 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 999003A081C for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 10:23:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.5
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.5 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.249, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no 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 R7WoVCILH38C for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 10:23:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pj1-x102b.google.com (mail-pj1-x102b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::102b]) (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 BB72C3A00D3 for <lsr@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 10:23:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pj1-x102b.google.com with SMTP id ga6so1102317pjb.1 for <lsr@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 10:23:57 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=Soqa0WecpQzDO27Qpy8Vc2ND4USp0LVDxk6Dmtweqfc=; b=e2IcMg76/PvrVPE4WO2grRtSEca6XZdRVCewTXUoWVDLa2hj2hO/LQstp2yO3kevHb HCBXEPC4Rgy+EYCZvfZ269dvcXFgMoxtG8Pto7tg0wULWm7a52Z9fKh3gIwKxi6U+uGI YQyegiuVMA+so5ghJ8AOhlIm6EbUGAOQEBfBXpTpKfdoq1/NU5kmG9ds005YVtYucpR7 GM/7FI8Iz0uSVnZIuVOH0FxsDduTfFIYI9LRKt1TrYwutN4spk+WRl9cVgytaeE7DZd7 YTJFYVWu2IyULUPGMNOVfeLMVCE2c5PTa3+T40h8u6dUFgobdt2lJvxOZqNEX+pLbgES BMOg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=Soqa0WecpQzDO27Qpy8Vc2ND4USp0LVDxk6Dmtweqfc=; b=WgLG6x2eOYmwldRq5JyHuAIiyR/EYQJTCp6M6OhaRRfYW/KXuGA+8HB96m+mxq1o6f /Nhq/PTEqwOzRZPPpg33H7Bqm+6yBXyM0GrGCShhpadlX9fifl+ZaQbvOZWMB75yfCfx HfWjxpHm2N8kPd1gV1S9tGHVK2eYViAk79xCP3FByTx+8q5J9+3crvKeRAK/ZBd+aPOI q0YHRvIunKb1jWoEeq4sfPUFh3BHR7WIIw3+f0iCBbjCgg55bpPGM1P3TZNiau8m0lPt i7NIkvANSt5kqjuAAmarVa8gPXuNuPtMs5HyB4bENL2HHYkno851H/JqP/b6E2MlSEV/ yTNQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532/PbmQfUrV7QBN5tJKDKSkPT+HsI1FlF15yhy8SdV7wlowkB9g PZkIMWFE3ugv6gB/6xGmxjk=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzDd/x1hSPUPS1BVf47aS3R5BtWuoOr6N+hqPeyEmv3q7n5p9PTmlovfUebeojOeH0CEidJKA==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:599a:: with SMTP id p26mr4024987pli.322.1591809837162; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 10:23:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.95.85.233] ([162.210.129.5]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o1sm301234pja.49.2020.06.10.10.23.55 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 10 Jun 2020 10:23:56 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: Tony Li <tony1athome@gmail.com>
From: tony.li@tony.li
Message-Id: <E1A4F856-9D9B-46CB-BE1D-5D8D3B221340@tony.li>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_BD164EA9-637F-4709-9330-A1733E12D21F"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.80.23.2.2\))
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 10:23:54 -0700
In-Reply-To: <CA+wi2hOPEP=xT34QVV=ZYAg3ou1=gsg1n=5x3ZQXy_p84dt65A@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Christian Hopps <chopps@chopps.org>, lsr@ietf.org
To: Tony Przygienda <tonysietf@gmail.com>
References: <790B898F-DB03-499E-BAAE-369504539475@chopps.org> <22086D70-6A19-4EA3-B15B-405FD5271262@chopps.org> <CA+wi2hMGcfqgPBoWLbqhS5vrF_Jy1RtAM7iMan4uYUjEc9X_2Q@mail.gmail.com> <48779A7B-FC92-495E-A2D6-98700E9FB337@chopps.org> <CA+wi2hOPEP=xT34QVV=ZYAg3ou1=gsg1n=5x3ZQXy_p84dt65A@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.80.23.2.2)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/J80ik7OoLZ7-WczdGGktEKNd_ok>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] Thoughts on the area proxy and flood reflector drafts.
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: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 17:24:00 -0000

Tony,


> On Jun 10, 2020, at 9:40 AM, Tony Przygienda <tonysietf@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> You do seem to be carrying as WG member a hot torch for area-proxy for some reason, that's fine with me, frankly, I had extensive discussions with customers when DriveNet was being proposed to them (which AFAIS is basically area-proxy) and the solution is intriguing but it did not cut lots of requirements of large customers and there are a lot of unresolved issues operationally with an approach like that. 


Drivenets, as I understand it, is an attempt to physically deaggregate a multi-chassis fabric down to the chip level using a proprietary chip-set-specific cell based interlink protocol. However, it retains a single control plane and as such looks like a single IS-IS system.  It has no relationship whatsoever to area proxy.

Regards,
Tony

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email