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

"Aijun Wang" <wangaijun@tsinghua.org.cn> Fri, 16 August 2019 06:26 UTC

Return-Path: <wangaijun@tsinghua.org.cn>
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 1C421120033 for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Aug 2019 23:26:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 Fy9nALnDwCoU for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Aug 2019 23:26:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from m176115.mail.qiye.163.com (m176115.mail.qiye.163.com [59.111.176.115]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1C59120013 for <lsr@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Aug 2019 23:26:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from WangajPC (unknown [219.142.69.77]) by m176115.mail.qiye.163.com (Hmail) with ESMTPA id 68FF866322F; Fri, 16 Aug 2019 14:26:30 +0800 (CST)
From: "Aijun Wang" <wangaijun@tsinghua.org.cn>
To: "'Acee Lindem \(acee\)'" <acee@cisco.com>, <lsr@ietf.org>
References: <221704DC-8BA6-4B2D-8D40-16CE52054243@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <221704DC-8BA6-4B2D-8D40-16CE52054243@cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 14:26:31 +0800
Message-ID: <00ab01d553fb$8bbc5550$a334fff0$@org.cn>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00AC_01D5543E.99DF9550"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: AQHVU2mPakHnso4QGkWvntJgG/1/A6b9TmKw
Content-Language: zh-cn
X-HM-Spam-Status: e1kfGhgUHx5ZQUtXWQgYFAkeWUFZVkpVTU9KQkJCQk5CQk9OTUNZV1koWU FKTEtLSjdXWS1ZQUlXWQkOFx4IWUFZNTQpNjo3JCkuNz5ZBg++
X-HM-Sender-Digest: e1kMHhlZQR0aFwgeV1kSHx4VD1lBWUc6PSo6Nio5GDlWPzwaHj8iIwg5 ESwaFE9VSlVKTk1OQkhNTEJLQ0tMVTMWGhIXVQwaFRwaEhEOFTsPCBIVHBMOGlUUCRxVGBVFWVdZ EgtZQVlJSkJVSk9JVU1CVUxMWVdZCAFZQUpDT0lDNwY+
X-HM-Tid: 0a6c991b2bdd9373kuws68ff866322f
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/SAN--DIVG199QfGrLfxLrPbCDrs>
Subject: [Lsr] =?utf-8?b?562U5aSNOiAgIOetlOWkjTogIExTUiBXb3JraW5nIEdyb3Vw?= =?utf-8?q?_Adoption_Call_for_=22Hierarchical_IS-IS=22_-_draft-li-lsr-isis?= =?utf-8?q?-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 06:26:37 -0000

Hi, Acee:

 

It’s interesting to extend the ISIS hierarchical in this way. What I considering is the complexity of its deployment in future. Maybe we can discuss/emphasizes on this aspect deep later.

 

Best Regards.

 

Aijun Wang

China Telecom

 

发件人: lsr-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:lsr-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 Acee Lindem (acee)
发送时间: 2019年8月15日 21:02
收件人: Aijun Wang; lsr@ietf.org
主题: Re: [Lsr] 答复: LSR Working Group Adoption Call for "Hierarchical IS-IS" - draft-li-lsr-isis-hierarchical-isis-01

 

Speaking as LSR WG Member:

 

Hi Aijun, 

I agree that most deployments will not move to greater than two levels given that we’ve gone this many decades with two and the predominant underlay deployment is one level. However, there appears to be sufficient interest and couple with good technical work on the specification to move to the next stage and adopt this as a working group document.  

Thanks,
Acee

 

From: Aijun Wang <wangaijun@tsinghua.org.cn>
Date: Thursday, August 15, 2019 at 3:11 AM
To: Acee Lindem <acee@cisco.com>om>, "lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>
Subject: 答复: [Lsr] LSR Working Group Adoption Call for "Hierarchical IS-IS" - draft-li-lsr-isis-hierarchical-isis-01

 

Some comments on this draft:

1. The size of network is increasing, but it is becoming more flat. Is it the right direction to make the network more hierarchical? 

2. More hierarchical network means the traffic will also be traversed in hierarchical way, is it more efficient?

3. Is there any other methods to scale out the IS-IS deployment?

 

 

Best Regards.

 

Aijun Wang

China Telecom

 

发件人: lsr-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:lsr-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 Acee Lindem (acee)
发送时间: 2019年8月12日 22:33
收件人: lsr@ietf.org
主题: [Lsr] LSR Working Group Adoption Call for "Hierarchical IS-IS" - draft-li-lsr-isis-hierarchical-isis-01

 

This begins a two week LSR Working Group Adoption Poll for the "Hierarchical IS-IS" - draft-li-lsr-isis-hierarchical-isis-01. The poll will end at 12:00 AM UTC on August 27th, 2019. Please indicate your support of objection on this list prior to the end of the adoption poll.

 

Thanks,

Acee