Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-white-distoptflood-00.txt

Russ -

Having reviewed the draft, I have the following high level comments:

1)Section 3 defines an algorithm which is used to "calculate" the flooding topology. As such, this draft is not an alternative to draft-ietf-lsr-dynamic-flooding.  It is simply one of potentially many drafts which may be written which will define such an algorithm,
Note that definition of algorithms is outside the scope of draft-ietf-lsr-dynamic-flooding.

The algorithm defined in your draft is by its nature a distributed algorithm i.e., your algorithm cannot be supported in centralized mode as defined by draft-ietf-lsr-dynamic-flooding.
However, nodes could advertise/agree on using this algorithm as a distributed algorithm using the signaling mechanisms defined in draft-ietf-lsr-dynamic-flooding.
I think this should be made clear in your draft.

2)The use of Circuit Scoped LSPs (RFC 7356) to flood standard L1/L2 LSPs to "DNR" nodes as defined in Section 3.1 of the draft is an invalid usage of CS-LSPs. The content of CS-LSPs is NOT identical to standard LSPs and the 1:1 equivalence you seem to require is inconsistent with RFC 7356.

3)The adjacency formation logic discussed in Section 2 isn’t directly relevant to calculating a flooding topology. There are existing implementations which use the techniques you define as a means of reducing redundant flooding associated with adjacency bringup when there are parallel links between two nodes. Note this can be (and is) done without  requiring protocol extensions/specification i.e., a node can do this today without introducing any interoperability issues. So while this is definitely a good idea, it isn’t directly related to the work on flooding topologies and I think is better removed from the draft.

   Les

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lsr <lsr-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of 7riw77@gmail.com
> Sent: Sunday, March 31, 2019 6:18 PM
> To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) <ginsberg@cisco.com>; lsr@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Lsr] FW: New Version Notification for draft-white-distoptflood-
> 00.txt
> 
> 
> > The WG just went through a lengthy consideration of multiple flooding
> > optimization drafts and selected https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-
> ietf-
> > lsr-dynamic-flooding/ as the vehicle for the WG to use to move forward in
> > this area.
> 
> Yep.
> 
> > It would be good if, in the context of the above, you articulated why it
> makes
> > sense for the WG to do yet another round of such discussion.
> 
> ==
> In this idea, the flooding topology is computed within an IGP area
>    with the dense topology either centrally on an elected node, termed
>    the Area Leader, or in a distributed manner on all nodes that are
>    supporting Dynamic Flooding.
> ==
> 
> Because this is only one way to solve the problem... The process outlined in
> the draft I just published is a different and simpler way that applies to a wider
> range of topologies than the dynamic flooding draft does, afaict.
> 
> 😊 /r
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Lsr mailing list
> Lsr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr