IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Tony Przygienda <tonysietf@gmail.com> Wed, 10 June 2020 17:26 UTC

Return-Path: <tonysietf@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 73C863A083D for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 10:26:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 I0MFx2Pui1D1 for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 10:26:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-il1-x12b.google.com (mail-il1-x12b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::12b]) (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 9E10F3A07AA for <lsr@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 10:26:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-il1-x12b.google.com with SMTP id z2so2749844ilq.0 for <lsr@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 10:26:27 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=N134P1UlZpaPkaZ+GSkvWeTE2nEtzdyzAeD6R+Cg/5Y=; b=hB5AbBSBAnFhBlYOl9Ykhl6PIZ9qn5lJ9P8Cfkj5l4Bl1hsZlO2W1UsFsMiNhpKDlf BT8mvnPYSltck0E8UnZlzwHP2Pt+5o4o1ODPg9QBRj+6+Tolg5w+lNyyemAfYCjxsqSl sTp+GXNefFz2UmaIxKuWDl/ldAYgxe1AS/w+dtTO5/n7JqkHdIzxs2Df9p1sxt4hawFs FfH0xfwVk4lFwVIr/PKj7mUFE7kHKIdHFKczkXFst+RtGHr+9iR9S84tBPmRj3ifpcmj wPNfATBYu0mZVjEvxntwh3PrLKUhG2wpU5H3kwQDLY7FNOblOIctUn8VJYSUMFXsVRwN TElw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=N134P1UlZpaPkaZ+GSkvWeTE2nEtzdyzAeD6R+Cg/5Y=; b=KD3dtlOQFmHruVc+ejqmayrDTAUZYsngblvL22CUPeX1BYIkqGJWAZ/pAlHioRLkOe feKzayIOLRTOD2De53PZY/LH7aZTvCHHvh4u2zwDj2JYZ3jExcIE1Mi+funpy2bs6z0y Y/Jh+0vYlY/9/BuO9KaOswQVeT5DcKSFB9+QeL26HxsGTK3ctvvub4gLar3kx07ENLDE 8DSpTYkj8dJAhfYEdDvIr/kqXL7wuaIostEnrZ503duzPVMIzEABluISxJTjG/yQw9GY U+ZmCjNPjZZrOVmKE7PJR5Y2cJFrXZ4jxzi60IHwB0aScS/syIpC4zEYtYZBKmxlNxMb vYYQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532RQ1J2KZgLFeBX0lKgEPm3eM8FlrAQE0WS6jHaITXsxnUO1d1o gGRqz5rWmCXx5pLTdmvBnxqITLk4tQdsM/vlR7l/Q0mL
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwiuOJC0auAX5LlbTGlxbL1M6ZXfo5KZ+m8pScecmMDTthb1i2jhTmxLLXxcv6AhCPbzvCkREvHYeHkmN6Dl4E=
X-Received: by 2002:a92:4001:: with SMTP id n1mr4057010ila.269.1591809986922; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 10:26:26 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
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> <E1A4F856-9D9B-46CB-BE1D-5D8D3B221340@tony.li>
In-Reply-To: <E1A4F856-9D9B-46CB-BE1D-5D8D3B221340@tony.li>
From: Tony Przygienda <tonysietf@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 10:25:36 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+wi2hMvYjFJsCELxhymjXGPSPunAgrhZfo8bB7RMLttYdjfdg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li>
Cc: Christian Hopps <chopps@chopps.org>, lsr@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d20cb305a7be2469"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/VnVbd3EBCFZPgedcCsDOhjLXDyA>
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 17:26:31 -0000

ok, let's not drag vendor specific stuff in. I shouldn't have brought it up
I guess, outside the scope of IETF threads ...

thanks

--- tony

On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 10:23 AM <tony.li@tony.li> wrote:

>
> 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