Re: [Lsr] 答复: Option B from "Migration between normal flooding and flooding reduction"

Aijun -

What is missing in this discussion is a definition of the problem to be solved.

Current draft relies on event driven updates to LSPs - the same mechanism that has been used for 30 years to detect all manner of changes in the network.

Before defining a "solution" (let alone voting for which one is best) it would be good to have a definition of what problem is unaddressed currently.

    Les

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lsr <lsr-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Aijun Wang
> Sent: Monday, May 27, 2019 11:16 PM
> To: 'Tony Li' <tony1athome@gmail.com>; 'Robert Raszuk'
> <robert@raszuk.net>
> Cc: lsr@ietf.org
> Subject: [Lsr] 答复: Option B from "Migration between normal flooding and
> flooding reduction"
> 
> Hi, Tony:
> 
> How the receiver judge the leader has stopped advertising the Area Leader
> sub-TLV? Do you need some timers?
> >From the current discussion, I think the explicit instruction that proposed by
> Huaimo is more acceptable.
> 
> 
> Best Regards.
> 
> Aijun Wang
> Network R&D and Operation Support Department
> China Telecom Corporation Limited Beijing Research Institute,Beijing, China.
> 
> -----邮件原件-----
> 发件人: Tony Li [mailto:tony1athome@gmail.com]
> 发送时间: 2019年5月27日 12:20
> 收件人: Robert Raszuk
> 抄送: lsr@ietf.org
> 主题: Re: [Lsr] Option B from "Migration between normal flooding and
> flooding reduction"
> 
> 
> Hi Robert,
> 
> > The current draft is pretty robust in terms of area leader election. It also
> says that  "Any node that is capable MAY advertise its eligibility to become
> Area Leader”
> 
> 
> Correct.  This can be all systems. It can be one. For redundancy, a few would
> be sensible.
> 
> 
> > With that can you confirm the procedure to "resign" as area leader ?
> 
> 
> Stop advertising the Area Leader sub-TLV.  It’s that simple.
> 
> 
> > Especially that under those circumstances just having active area leader to
> resign clearly is not enough to change given flooding scheme.
> 
> 
> If there are multiple potential area leaders, then all of them would have to
> resign.
> 
> 
> > In some deployments all eligible nodes may advertise such capability which
> in turn the "resign" procedure would require NMS action to disable such
> capability by configuration and re-flooding it. Not that I am advocating it nor
> see need for complex migration procedures, but just would like to better
> understand the "resign" part.
> 
> 
> Correct, this is rightfully an NMS operation.
> 
> Tony
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Lsr mailing list
> Lsr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Lsr mailing list
> Lsr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr