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

Tony Li <tony1athome@gmail.com> Sun, 26 May 2019 21:15 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 E79D9120121 for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 26 May 2019 14:15:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, 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
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 8sBgUEqzZmnj for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 26 May 2019 14:15:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pg1-x533.google.com (mail-pg1-x533.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::533]) (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 B198712012B for <lsr@ietf.org>; Sun, 26 May 2019 14:15:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pg1-x533.google.com with SMTP id w34so3230341pga.12 for <lsr@ietf.org>; Sun, 26 May 2019 14:15:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=gFlgd/5kYPmLver+2JGG1LbnsYees4Saq8gn08ai+ew=; b=W7vQqJA75r0UEb4OH8U8HZ8hij8vCzya3oO2exoXgdHPLbrGHGvTzcMGnEn5YkBQbx Co70FFS9UPE6pEAwYlD7mcReOI/UxfaoCq0DnOeiffMxKNnAIgVTUSMnj8xtsoxSseBE 9iMw6E14hnzPWlHZCS8fy2z5yY+qvL05g+ZHvrcVu5RP0w00B7RNHyG5CI79IUlfrbIZ 3+6EUAjzDH2CAEoMcQrwOkdIMBkbuMVLBWDvHhsc1wtjLACn9IF7w1FN6HddY22PfL4o XL4r5//QDZBB2Fe3/1h9kYCLo6hH1dkEI17mT62HqRocu6dTl9lJbD9tpff64xRDgqqo 6gbg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=gFlgd/5kYPmLver+2JGG1LbnsYees4Saq8gn08ai+ew=; b=Ux8kl4HbifqGPDKfZ8Z1XsSp5f5FwIB9hoZM74dP0dqD+3glGA+jCkyW6JaRqq6bIr 8D2gmgFggaqzHOr2453aebeYwteU+VTscXWQ+AaV+DxGqNRZoTYSXQvjRAvlJwryRvQ8 OJD/unSaGfqcl3YKuDrrYNCSTp1m6IdduNROJvBeV4DcIctGlY1ynoMpKRPkjjNconX6 bkiWg1BQZKd0ssAGKPa+fEjBA1qKwe6+Ut0Le2hbQNYvLJXei5nhCime46sqbrl/4sd0 zizltN1+gBF51ICdOh3JwHr9l/Fb4jTRy4daxDqETw245O9WqHNSrtzm9UaBST7kEnq9 tufg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUdoibrKaXr/imJjCzfJbR05jfpYIlTSxyIIGlopL5xbmb0StK9 BkSNyo7OFCtVyJT/V7ylNX0=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyS7EMl92u3xAvvF4f2wpleP1AppTXfqPZCLWCIPgr+YQwGCHbKSj6cP3Yna8VsApOduhA9pw==
X-Received: by 2002:a62:6444:: with SMTP id y65mr132603678pfb.148.1558905320909; Sun, 26 May 2019 14:15:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.5] (c-73-158-115-137.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [73.158.115.137]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g17sm9787514pfb.56.2019.05.26.14.15.19 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 26 May 2019 14:15:20 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tony Li <tony1athome@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <FB4EDF4B-C94D-4654-8D3A-A1567E0D76B1@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_B00E442F-0EDF-44BE-B180-D1D5EAF78A5C"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.8\))
Date: Sun, 26 May 2019 14:15:18 -0700
In-Reply-To: <MN2PR13MB34701B410A172A950BAE6B5EA31C0@MN2PR13MB3470.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
Cc: Les Ginsberg <ginsberg@cisco.com>, "lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>
To: Huaimo Chen <hchen@futurewei.com>
References: <5316A0AB3C851246A7CA5758973207D463BBD21B@sjceml521-mbs.china.huawei.com> <CF5E5FE7-C2E2-4200-AE8A-6BF5E558258C@tony.li> <5316A0AB3C851246A7CA5758973207D463BC58F5@sjceml521-mbx.china.huawei.com> <BYAPR11MB3638190EC8AD3235AB2304E7C1060@BYAPR11MB3638.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <5316A0AB3C851246A7CA5758973207D463BC5C32@sjceml521-mbx.china.huawei.com> <BYAPR11MB3638722A90E40777657001B8C1000@BYAPR11MB3638.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <CAOj+MMEijyB7qd4oUaOe7W19j+76CjH+mzJ3mvcVtOjn5fvmdw@mail.gmail.com> <BYAPR11MB363863B393A181264E07B042C1000@BYAPR11MB3638.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <MN2PR13MB3470B24A328311A23BAAC5B8A3000@MN2PR13MB3470.namprd13.prod.outlook.com> <MN2PR13MB34701B410A172A950BAE6B5EA31C0@MN2PR13MB3470.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.8)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/mKM_srC0OV08qhXcpsH7hgS9Tsg>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] Option B from "Migration between normal flooding and flooding reduction"
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: Sun, 26 May 2019 21:15:27 -0000

Hi Huaimo,

None of this is necessary.

If we’re in legacy flooding and want to use centralized mode, the area leader simply advertises that.  No additions are necessary.

If we’re in legacy flooding and want to use distributed mode, the area leader simply advertises that and the algorithm to use.  No additions are necessary.

If we’re in centralized mode and the area leader elects to use distributed mode, then it need only change to advertise the algorithm in use.  No additions are necessary.

If we’re in distributed mode and the area leader elects to use centralized mode, then it need only change to advertise centralized mode. No additions are necessary.

If we’re in centralized mode and the area leader decides to transition to legacy flooding, then it can simply resign as area leader. No additions are necessary.

If we’re in distributed mode and the area leader decides to transition to legacy flooding, then it can also simply resign as area leader. No additions are necessary.

In short, no additions are necessary.

Tony


> On May 26, 2019, at 1:01 PM, Huaimo Chen <hchen@futurewei.com>; wrote:
> 
> Hi Les,
>    
>     Option B is about the transfer between flooding reduction (either centralized mode or distributed mode) and normal flooding. It is from the procedure in thread “Migration between normal flooding and flooding reduction”, and described below in some details, including behavior and extension. In the case that the formats below are messed up, a .pdf file is attached.
> 
>     Note that the transfer between centralized mode and distributed mode is in draft-ietf-lsr-dynamic-flooding and Option B can be considered as an extension to it (refer to the Figure below).
>      /-----------------------------------------------------------\
>      | Flooding Reduction                                        |
>      |                                                           |
>      |            “(Transfer to) Centralized Mode”               |
>      |                              |                            |
>      |   /------------------\       V      /------------------\  |
>      |   | Centralized Mode | ----------à | Distributed Mode |  |
>      |   |                  | ß---------- |                  |  |
>      |   \------------------/       ^      \------------------/  |
>      |                              |                            |
>      |           “(Transfer to) Distributed Mode”                |
>      |                                                           |
>      \-----------------------------------------------------------/
>                            |             ^
>         “(Transfer to)     |             | “(Transfer to)
>         Normal Flooding”   |             | Flooding Reduction”
>                            V             | 
>      /-----------------------------------------------------------\
>      | Normal Flooding                                           |
>      |                                                           |
>      \-----------------------------------------------------------/        
>  
>  Figure 1. Transfer between Flooding Reduction and Normal Flooding
> 
>     When the IGP in an area runs in the flooding reduction (either centralized mode or distributed mode), the behavior to transfer from the flooding reduction to the normal flooding is as follows:
> on the leader node, “(Transfer to) Normal Flooding” is configured; 
> the leader advertises “(Transfer to) Normal Flooding” to all the other nodes;
> every node transfers to the normal flooding after obtaining the instruction for transferring to the normal flooding. Every node will floods link states using all its local links instead of the local links on the flooding topology (FT for short). 
> 
> For the centralized mode, after transferring to normal flooding, the leader of the area stops computing and advertising the FT, each of the other nodes stops receiving and building the FT.
> 
> For the distributed mode, every node in the area stops computing and building the FT.
> At this point, the IGP in the area has transferred to the normal flooding from the flooding reduction (either centralized mode or distributed mode).
> 
>     When the IGP in the area runs in the normal flooding, the behavior to transfer from the normal flooding to the flooding reduction (either centralized mode or distributed mode) is as follows. It is almost the same as that described in draft-ietf-lsr-dynamic-flooding, but with minor enhancement in blue color.
> 
>     For centralized mode (i.e., when centralized mode is configured), 
> the leader advertises “Flooding Reduction” in the centralized mode to all the other nodes;
> the leader computes the FT and advertises the FT to the other nodes;
> each node floods the link states using the FT after it receives/has the whole FT.
> 
>     For distributed mode (i.e., when distributed mode is configured), an algorithm is also configured to be used by every node to compute FT
> the leader advertises “Flooding Reduction” in the distributed mode including the algorithm to all the other nodes;
> each node computes its FT and floods the link states using the FT.
>     
>     At this point, the IGP in the area has transferred from the normal flooding to the flooding reduction (either centralized mode or distributed mode).
>  
>     To support the above behaviors, Area Leader Sub-TLV needs to be extended. Three bits of one octet may be used to indicate a flooding mode (FM) such as “Normal Flooding” or "Flooding Reduction". The other bits are reserved. The values proposed for FM are as follows:
> 1 for “Flooding Reduction” (centralized or distributed mode is implied/indicated by the algorithm)
> 2 for “Normal Flooding”
> 
> For OSPF Area Leader Sub-TLV, the current Sub-TLV below
> 
>    0                   1                   2                   3
>    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
>   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>   |              Type             |             Length            |
>   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>   |    Priority   |   Algorithm   |            Reserved           |
>   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>                   (Current) OSPF Area Leader Sub-TLV
> is extended to
>    0                   1                   2                   3
>    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
>   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>   |              Type             |             Length            |
>   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>   |    Priority   |   Algorithm   | FM  |      Reserved           |
>   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
>                                                    (Extended) OSPF Area Leader Sub-TLV
> 
> FM = 1:  Flooding Reduction
>               Alogrithm  =  0:  Centralized Mode; Algorithm = N (N>0): Distributed Mode.
> FM = 2: Normal Flooding 
>  
> Similarly for IS-IS Area Leader Sub-TLV, the current Sub-TLV below,
>       0                   1                   2                   3
>       0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
>      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>      |     Type      |     Length    | Priority      |   Algorithm   |
>      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>                    (Current) IS-IS Area Leader Sub-TLV
> is extended to
>       0                   1                   2                   3
>       0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
>      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>      |     Type      |     Length    | Priority      |   Algorithm   |
>      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>      | FM  |Reserved |
>      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>                    (Extended) IS-IS Area Leader Sub-TLV
> 
> Best Regards,
> Huaimo
> From: Huaimo Chen
> Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2019 12:17 PM
> To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); Robert Raszuk
> Cc: Huaimo Chen; Tony Li; lsr@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Lsr] Migration between normal flooding and flooding reduction
>  
> Hi Les,
> 
>     The procedure in the thread is more comprehensive somehow, which includes 
>     Option B,
>     the step related to the leader election, which is optional. I put a note in that step, 
>     and so on. It seems better to split it into two or more different topics. 
>     
>     The description and extension for supporting Option B is described in the procedure.  
> 
> Best Regards,
> Huaimo
>  
> On Wed, May 22, 2019, 05:46 Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) <ginsberg@cisco.com <mailto:ginsberg@cisco.com>> wrote:
> Huaimo –
>  
> The thread started with you defining multi-step processes for electing an area leader and enabling/disabling dynamic flooding – each of which involved multiple state changes on each node in the network. (Please scroll to the bottom to see your original post.)
>  
> Both Tony and I responded by saying “no need for that”. Election of an Area Leader proceeds just like election of DIS on a LAN in IS-IS – totally event driven.
> Enabling/disabling of dynamic flooding happens based on what algorithm the Area Leader advertises and whether (in centralized mode) the Flooding Topology is advertised.
>  
> Sections 6.4, 6.5, and 6.7 describe this.
>  
> In response to my comment you have now changed the topic to discussing whether a config change is required on every node in order to enable/disable dynamic flooding.
> Different topic. It’s a bit hard to keep the thread focused when you change the topic.
> In brief, I do not see a problem supporting your “Option B” below – and the draft provides for that. We may want to make the wording more precise – I am certainly open to that – but the capability is already there.
>  
>    Les
>  
>  
> From: Huaimo Chen <huaimo.chen@huawei.com <mailto:huaimo.chen@huawei.com>> 
> Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 3:13 PM
> To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) <ginsberg@cisco.com <mailto:ginsberg@cisco.com>>; tony.li@tony.li <mailto:tony.li@tony.li>
> Cc: lsr@ietf.org <mailto:lsr@ietf.org>
> Subject: RE: [Lsr] Migration between normal flooding and flooding reduction
>  
> Hi Les,
>  
>     Consider the following options to transfer all nodes in an area from flooding reduction to normal flooding or from normal flooding to flooding reduction:
> Option A: Go to all the nodes (if there are thousands of nodes, go to all of them), execute “disable flooding reduction” or “enable flooding reduction” on all of them.
> Option B: Go to the leader (even if there are thousands of nodes, just go to the leader), execute “roll back to normal flooding” or “transfer to flooding reduction” on the leader.
>  
> Option B should be supported. Option B provides a simpler and quicker way to transfer between flooding reduction and normal flooding.  
>  
> It seems that Option A is similar to going to all the nodes and configuring an algorithm to compute the FT for distributed mode; and Option B is similar to going to the leader and configuring an algorithm to compute the FT for distributed mode, which is used in draft-ietf-lsr-dynamic-flooding.
>  
> Best Regards,
> Huaimo
> From: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) [mailto:ginsberg@cisco.com <mailto:ginsberg@cisco.com>] 
> Sent: Monday, May 20, 2019 4:39 PM
> To: Huaimo Chen <huaimo.chen@huawei.com <mailto:huaimo.chen@huawei.com>>; tony.li@tony.li <mailto:tony.li@tony.li>
> Cc: lsr@ietf.org <mailto:lsr@ietf.org>
> Subject: RE: [Lsr] Migration between normal flooding and flooding reduction
>  
> Huaimo –
>  
> I, like Tony, am wondering what problem you are trying to solve.
>  
> Note that updated LSPs/LSAs which are received on an interface which the receiving node believes is NOT part of the flooding topology are NEVER discarded. They are processed and flooded on those interfaces which the receiver believes are part of the flooding topology.  So there is no need for the coordination you propose. The network can transition from no flooding optimizations to flooding optimizations – or vice versa – simply by enabling/disabling optimizations.
>  
> The speed at which the migration occurs is not critical. What is critical is that correct flooding is not compromised during the migration and (as Tony has noted) based on testing that works without any issues.
>  
>    Les
>  
>  
> From: Lsr <lsr-bounces@ietf.org <mailto:lsr-bounces@ietf.org>> On Behalf Of Huaimo Chen
> Sent: Monday, May 20, 2019 12:53 PM
> To: tony.li@tony.li <mailto:tony.li@tony.li>
> Cc: lsr@ietf.org <mailto:lsr@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: [Lsr] Migration between normal flooding and flooding reduction
>  
> Hi Tony,
>  
>     For the case that the IGP running in an area has been doing the flooding reduction, in order to let the IGP on every node in the area roll back to the normal flooding quickly and easily, a procedure for migrating from the flooding reduction to normal flooding is needed. After back to normal flooding, if we want to let the IGP on every node do flooding reduction some time later, the procedure should be able to migrate from normal flooding to the flooding reduction quickly and easily.
>  
> Best Regards,
> Huaimo
> From: Tony Li [mailto:tony1athome@gmail.com <mailto:tony1athome@gmail.com>] On Behalf Of tony.li@tony.li <mailto:tony.li@tony.li>
> Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2019 1:17 PM
> To: Huaimo Chen <huaimo.chen@huawei.com <mailto:huaimo.chen@huawei.com>>
> Cc: lsr@ietf.org <mailto:lsr@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: [Lsr] Migration between normal flooding and flooding reduction
>  
>  
> Hi Huaimo,
>  
> Before we get into your procedure, I have to ask an important question: why is any process necessary?
>  
> In our experience, It Just Works.
>  
> You turn on dynamic flooding and the nodes with the feature start complying with the flooding topology.  Those that are not enabled perform legacy flooding. Obviously you don’t get the flooding reduction yet, but it grows incrementally as nodes are enabled.
>  
> What problem are you solving?
>  
> Tony
>  
>  
>  
> On May 18, 2019, at 8:15 AM, Huaimo Chen <huaimo.chen@huawei.com <mailto:huaimo.chen@huawei.com>> wrote:
>  
> Hi Tony,
>  
> Two possible procedures (Procedure A and B) for the migration are listed below for discussions.
>  
> In the beginning, the IGP running in a network area does the normal flooding. The migration from the normal flooding to the flooding reduction (either centralized mode or distributed mode) or in reverse (i.e., roll back from the flooding reduction to the normal flooding) may follow a procedure of a few steps. One of the two procedures below may be used.
>  
> Procedure A:
>  
> 1.       For each node that is eligible to become a leader for flooding reduction in centralized mode, a priority for the leader election is configured on the node. (This step is called “Priority Configuration”).
> 2.       Every node advertises its priority for the leader election and the algorithms that it supports for computing flooding topology for distributed mode. (This step is called “Priority and Algorithms Distribution”). Note that this step and the step above may be considered as one step. After a priority is configured on a node, the node will advertises its priority and algorithms.
> 3.       On the node that will be elected as the leader, “Start Leader Election” is configured. The node does the leader election after obtaining “Start Leader Election”. It also advertises this to all the other nodes in the area. Each of them will do the leader election after receiving this. (This step is called “Leader Election”). Note that this step may be removed. Without this step, the leader election may occur multiple times until the leader with the highest priority and highest node ID is elected if we want that the leader is the node that has the highest priority and highest node ID in the area.
> 4.       On the node that is elected as the leader, centralized mode or distributed mode is configured. (This step is called “Flooding Reduction Mode Configuration”).
> For centralized mode (i.e., when centralized mode is configured),
> 1)      the leader advertises “Flooding Reduction” in the centralized mode to all the other nodes;
> 2)      the leader computes the flooding topology and advertises the flooding topology to the other nodes;
> 3)      each node floods the link states using the flooding topology after it receives/has the whole flooding topology.
> For distributed mode (i.e., when distributed mode is configured), an algorithm is also configured to be used by every node to compute flooding topology
> 1)      the leader advertises “Flooding Reduction” in the distributed mode including the algorithm to all the other nodes;
> 2)      each node computes its flooding topology and floods the link states using the flooding topology.
> At this point, the IGP running in the network area has migrated from the normal flooding to the flooding reduction (either centralized mode or distributed mode).
>  
> In centralized mode, configuring distributed mode (or changing the centralized mode to distributed mode through configuration) will transfer from centralized mode to distributed mode. In addition to step 1) and 2) above for the distributed mode, each node uses the centralized flooding reduction (i.e., floods the link states over its local links on the flooding topology computed by the leader of the area) until the distributed flooding reduction is fully functional for a given time such as 5 seconds. After this time, the node stops its centralized flooding reduction. The leader stops computing the flooding topology, advertising it to all the other routers, and using this flooding topology to flood the link states. Each of the other nodes stops receiving and building the flooding topology computed by the leader.
>  
> In distributed mode, configuring centralized mode (or changing the distributed mode to centralized mode through configuration) will transfer from distributed mode to centralized mode. In addition to step 1), 2) and 3) above for the centralized mode, each node uses the distributed flooding reduction (i.e., floods the link states over its local links on the flooding topology computed and built by itself) until the centralized flooding reduction is fully functional for a given time such as 5 seconds.
> 
> For the migration (or say roll back) from the flooding reduction to the normal flooding,
> a.       on the leader node, “Roll Back to Normal Flooding” is configured; (This step is called “Roll Back to Normal Flooding Configuration”).
> b.       the leader advertises “Roll Back to Normal Flooding” to all the other nodes; (This step is called “Roll Back to Normal Flooding Distribution”).
> c.       every node rolls back to the normal flooding after obtaining the instruction for rolling back to the normal flooding. Every node will floods link states using all its local links instead of the local links on the flooding topology. (This step is called “Stop Using Flooding Topology”).
> For the centralized mode, after rolling back to normal flooding, the leader of the area stops computing and advertising the flooding topology, each of the other nodes stops receiving and building the flooding topology.
> For the distributed mode, every node in the area stops computing and building the flooding topology.
>  
> At this point, the IGP running in the network area has rolled back to the normal flooding from the flooding reduction (either centralized mode or distributed mode).
>  
> After this point, if there is a need to migrate from the normal flooding to the flooding reduction, then go to step 4 (i.e., “Flooding Reduction Mode Configuration”) above.
>  
> One octet needs to be added into IS-IS and OSPF Area Leader Sub-TLV. Three bits of this octet are used to indicate an operation (OP) such as “Roll Back to Normal Flooding”. The other five bits are reserved. The values proposed for OP are as follows:
> 1 for “Flooding Reduction” (mode is implied/indicated by the algorithm)
> 2 for “Roll Back to Normal Flooding”
> 3 for “Start Leader Election” (This is not needed if step 3 above is removed).
>  
> 4 for “Start Priority and Algorithms Distribution” if Procedure B below is used.
>  
> In Procedure A, after rolling back to normal flooding, the information about the priority and algorithms in the LSA/LSP originated by each node is still in the network. If we want to remove this information from the network after rolling back to normal flooding, Procedure B below achieves this. It is derived from Procedure A through some changes which are in blue color.
>  
> Procedure B:
> 1.       For each node that is eligible to become a leader for flooding reduction in centralized mode, a priority for the leader election is configured on the node. (This step is called “Priority Configuration”).
> 2.       “Start Priority and Algorithms Distribution” is configured on the node that will be elected as the leader after all the nodes that are eligible for a leader are configured with their priorities. The node advertises “Start Priority and Algorithms Distribution” to all the other nodes in the area; every node advertises its priority and algorithms after obtaining “Start Priority and Algorithms Distribution”. (This step is called “Start Priority and Algorithms Distribution”).
> 3.       On the node that will be elected as the leader, “start leader election” is configured. The node does the leader election after obtaining “start leader election”. It also advertises this to all the other nodes in the area. Each of them will do the leader election after receiving this. (This step is called “Leader Election”).
> 4.       On the node that is elected as the leader, centralized mode or distributed mode is configured. (This step is called “Flooding Reduction Mode Configuration”).
> For centralized mode, 
> 1)      the leader advertises the centralized mode to all the other nodes;
> 2)      the leader computes the flooding topology and advertises the flooding topology to the other nodes;
> 3)      each node floods the link states using the flooding topology after it receives/has the whole flooding topology.
> For distributed mode, an algorithm is configured to be used by every node to compute flooding topology
> 1)      the leader advertises the distributed mode including the algorithm to all the other nodes;
> 2)      each node computes its flooding topology and floods the link states using the flooding topology.
> At this point, the IGP running in the network area has migrated from the normal flooding to the flooding reduction (either centralized mode or distributed mode).
>  
> In centralized mode, configuring distributed mode (or changing the centralized mode to distributed mode through configuration) will transfer from centralized mode to distributed mode. In addition to step 1) and 2) above for the distributed mode, each node uses the centralized flooding reduction (i.e., floods the link states over its local links on the flooding topology computed by the leader of the area) until the distributed flooding reduction is fully functional for a given time such as 5 seconds. After this time, the node stops its centralized flooding reduction. The leader stops computing the flooding topology, advertising it to all the other routers, and using this flooding topology to flood the link states. Each of the other nodes stops receiving and building the flooding topology computed by the leader.
>  
> In distributed mode, configuring centralized mode (or changing the distributed mode to centralized mode through configuration) will transfer from distributed mode to centralized mode. In addition to step 1), 2) and 3) above for the centralized mode, each node uses the distributed flooding reduction (i.e., floods the link states over its local links on the flooding topology computed and built by itself) until the centralized flooding reduction is fully functional for a given time such as 5 seconds.
>  
> For migration (or say roll back) from the flooding reduction to the normal flooding,
> a.       on the leader node, “Roll Back to Normal Flooding” is configured; (This step is called “Roll Back to Normal Flooding Configuration”).
> b.       the leader advertises “Roll Back to Normal Flooding” to all the other nodes; (This step is called “Roll Back to Normal Flooding Distribution”).
> c.       every node rolls back to the normal flooding after obtaining the instruction for rolling back to the normal flooding. Every node will floods link states using all its local links instead of the local links on the flooding topology. (This step is called “Stop Using Flooding Topology”).
> d.       every node removes the information about its priority and algorithms in the LSA/LSP that it originated. (This step is called “Remove Priority and Algorithms”).
> For the centralized mode, after rolling back to normal flooding, the leader of the area stops computing and advertising a flooding topology, the other nodes stops receiving and building the flooding topology.
> For the distributed mode, every node in the area stops computing and building flooding topology.
>  
> At this point, the IGP running in the network area has rolled back to the normal flooding from the flooding reduction (either centralized mode or distributed mode).
>  
> After this point, if there is a need to migrate from the normal flooding to the flooding reduction, then go to step 2 (i.e., “Start Priority and Algorithms Distribution”) above.
>  
>  
> Best Regards,
> Huaimo
> 
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Lsr mailing list
> Lsr@ietf.org <mailto:Lsr@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr <https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Flsr&data=02%7C01%7Chchen%40futurewei.com%7C9516e562de9147db7aa408d6debf4b91%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C636941310531008373&sdata=LEDUOOD0k8clPsyyeJtsztZgnS8qqE6RSLiv%2FpN9fbg%3D&reserved=0>
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Lsr mailing list
> Lsr@ietf.org <mailto:Lsr@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr <https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Flsr&data=02%7C01%7Chchen%40futurewei.com%7C9516e562de9147db7aa408d6debf4b91%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C636941310531018378&sdata=3aquGnFwLMkd1ECf%2Fkqp5P7RV5TNa%2BmNgmBFOmwNuWw%3D&reserved=0><Transfers-Normal-Reduction-2019-5-26.pdf>_______________________________________________
> Lsr mailing list
> Lsr@ietf.org <mailto:Lsr@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr>