IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Lsr] LSR Working Group Adoption Call for "Hierarchical IS-IS" - draft-li-lsr-isis-hierarchical-isis-01

tony.li@tony.li Fri, 16 August 2019 18:00 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 6A5A21200CD for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 16 Aug 2019 11:00:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.399
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.399 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.249, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 oZFy2DkksFZC for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 16 Aug 2019 11:00:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf1-x431.google.com (mail-pf1-x431.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::431]) (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 1E74212009C for <lsr@ietf.org>; Fri, 16 Aug 2019 11:00:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf1-x431.google.com with SMTP id g2so3512504pfq.0 for <lsr@ietf.org>; Fri, 16 Aug 2019 11:00:49 -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=AiaPq5uXYrhW3FMyhDlJtig97+RJjjiWod8EBJQCY7k=; b=LbQjEo1Epj3e4LOHdk4Nuolr0XliB4BTIoGDdU/U3r5K+nvXrDO9DNeXFI+kmzaZja iU5/Tg5bd/+TXW+X1BOLmjTfZbB9YrEMNvYfcUgGcx+aj5ZhFSmyV6U8h3JrVUhLjstf G/O9P6rwUY3OtQb7bKteYAlGgfXo69AlgVKz1kttkx0feNdiQsUQplcjqOmOdn7nUci/ uK8lz0gKChNgLMS3Yo4Su6fwnUfn6QPvRdjM/HpKUuLzZATN1ABAKGsIV2cG5uqObr2g QGnvI0YrMR0tH3VsNo431J8+o+SHZVqk+slBUEiKD9iS1g7ZSF5MC1+XEqyBB4QSOq6P BZsQ==
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=AiaPq5uXYrhW3FMyhDlJtig97+RJjjiWod8EBJQCY7k=; b=XTY4ZuBs3TkR9xsIocnosHv0DSlZxuPsfUieyxKTpO7LEWJAFVnZhcWTggUC/EXK2S Dk98VKwKxoJDRHyBVj6B5h6uId7j7ecPt0PeN4diFBPKDFJvhd5/9fQ0hSqlPuwCPl8o ffJGVZC9SA41CVYXGTibhA98T3VRRhuVRMqmrJZssx92NLUmRYT/vfk05BZ4rY/0CXTZ R8gP+DQmNs9UNMBdpCvcikQq9UOLMPS0/7BjGfzyxga9VKS878cDZEfCP2UlwvrCbyfN tZEpE14dbGAf+8eIQVkURvZBktjGaoQqie2T/vSPvSgVUWfEKzvRcs7qlPUoHwWbaSEI E00A==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAU+/5MeHwap96iP4NmWXDYeDGbdw8TMbnjLLuBewk8attEXicRC ZfGnR9T1YeDrQFIKtt5SakU=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqx045xaE6JWjQZZdcSw39aXii2dRXmym0jyDF72PBJV5ivhIEsIWMKlsrUjnmiuXoHFWiDI6w==
X-Received: by 2002:aa7:9e0a:: with SMTP id y10mr11825832pfq.93.1565978448645; Fri, 16 Aug 2019 11:00:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [172.22.228.115] ([162.210.130.3]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e6sm6482262pfn.71.2019.08.16.11.00.47 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 16 Aug 2019 11:00:47 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: Tony Li <tony1athome@gmail.com>
From: tony.li@tony.li
Message-Id: <4ABA6852-23CB-4B11-9FB2-C4A643740441@tony.li>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_81543F53-7CA0-4EE7-B5DF-02C09A55980C"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 11:00:47 -0700
In-Reply-To: <DF25D566-1EC3-483A-BCE9-5C6EDDF74617@tony.li>
Cc: Aijun Wang <wangaijun@tsinghua.org.cn>, Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>, lsr@ietf.org
To: Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li>
References: <8BAFFDB4-62B0-4018-966E-6861D89D0BD1@cisco.com> <01a501d55338$945c2b40$bd1481c0$@org.cn> <C90AD13E-1512-4373-9CF7-32BAD6D65EC6@tony.li> <CAOj+MMFNkVbgbN1v7Q_4PBfLVN=Me_whcR36Um-Eu_AgSDF4Xg@mail.gmail.com> <24D935ED-28C3-4A84-B42C-E429EC2D6FE8@tony.li> <00b601d553fe$9636a5a0$c2a3f0e0$@org.cn> <DF25D566-1EC3-483A-BCE9-5C6EDDF74617@tony.li>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/MI7eb_jD0lJoIx_uap8DxbiUZwg>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] LSR Working Group Adoption Call for "Hierarchical IS-IS" - draft-li-lsr-isis-hierarchical-isis-01
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: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 18:00:51 -0000

Hi Aijun,

Les kindly points out that what I’ve suggested here is completely non-standard and requires multiple IS-IS instances.

Tony



> On Aug 16, 2019, at 9:03 AM, tony.li@tony.li wrote:
> 
> Hi Aijun,
> 
>> If, as you stated,  we connect R1 and R7 via one link(although we will not do so, if we design the network hierarchically), how you flood the link information hierarchically but let the traffic between the two connected L1 area bypass the L2 area?
> 
> 
> The link between R1 and R7 needs to belong to either the top area or the bottom area.  R1 or R7 needs to participate in two areas and leak routes between the two areas.
> 
> Tony
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email