IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Lsvr] Kicking off the LSVR (Link State Vector Routing) charter discussion

Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com> Thu, 25 January 2018 22:34 UTC

Return-Path: <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: lsvr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lsvr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3AD112EADA for <lsvr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 14:34:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.997
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.997 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=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 lCh5Gu0UEHwx for <lsvr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 14:34:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ot0-x233.google.com (mail-ot0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c0f::233]) (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 4D5B812EAD9 for <lsvr@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 14:34:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ot0-x233.google.com with SMTP id a24so8463398otd.4 for <lsvr@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 14:34:12 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=pJpRgRvFOnTjj3R1mGLaueyRrcNcFseLWr0Bzmd6NN8=; b=YqNQCk4YLBEPV3oULJaf41Baugf5nE/RmBIcn9+kuU8bBZMJCWSnIclY8D52HCGFvF lhttiYo78GMknlBb04KgHlj63bSC0oF+Iu/ZnU/ST2NlBxHZiLcPSClFydEXLnj2uJ78 p7N17Myrz9s4cSus4j06B2uTqq7vppN0Q3MysItKqkIQhud3Nvu9bcNwS+lA87uattVl n5U+19tPk1YRl4rsbLpxKhjaQeoRwTcPNZK6SEEiH6k/K9GOZ6Si8hFSszvVQtvJX1gu j8F2/dh3mcUAD8QLdiDUN/QPNWiGK3ss20BcB+n4dV4cVRzKN1+hB6BU0REJLP5xMb89 k6YQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=pJpRgRvFOnTjj3R1mGLaueyRrcNcFseLWr0Bzmd6NN8=; b=JkytSvxKfsuKZ6gFWfK7bnGQ+VolEgv1mpEqWctWhmmAyd9CyOdkScxJgLTOaGsUQY NORhmMF1iVsTfcijJ1YF8a7e3Oo8TEO6OU59egztf3D1yBCINhW1lpr8j9bZDOFHGpVo h8eRtlYdGM4Tut3cu14qGJGshN67WPId7WQSrYlzpT6ljI/J9vimtHzHXVs5L0/WxbUh yAxf0hvcciOntvJ9hC2Ckin4NYdaHjSYppYkSTyB/ZUbFz0AGti40BLGrMkgepw+yHNb JO566Dys6tKPIQlwCltOSlcZ1ZPKBKoZ/dS4SI6AZwbIjF92DwEeWGEEp4dFJZuMrT6A I/1w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKwxytdrPEY+sTNYItDPo74Hr1lv9B8P57VONlZU8jrHXTYmfnt+NkZk TejHPHBMxZ1Coq+ylOkAmq8pGfdRrBHF3/xWdTY=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x224vY1fL5Vn8xBVtq5MTOreEx6T/x9q/pLfvsbgRzNcjB4k+bkjwkxH2hmIE6Cw3OWuyzHja4Wqk97NtTt0HtzU=
X-Received: by 10.157.22.220 with SMTP id s28mr12076626ots.317.1516919651787; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 14:34:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 1058052472880 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 14:34:11 -0800
From: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <m28tcllmor.wl-randy@psg.com>
References: <AM5PR0701MB2836FFBB9A9F6C3D7C3C7122E0110@AM5PR0701MB2836.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <f590456ccee0498eadbb5fa4e4e048cc@XCH-ALN-014.cisco.com> <m2shatlqsd.wl-randy@psg.com> <e7462ad1b5044442a40a505a8d8602c3@XCH-ALN-014.cisco.com> <m2k1w5loyu.wl-randy@psg.com> <4DD58182-10E6-480F-A787-DE03DE089355@gmail.com> <m28tcllmor.wl-randy@psg.com>
X-Mailer: Airmail (467)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 14:34:11 -0800
Message-ID: <CAMMESszeZPMK88a-b0yX=kzpo+TLm1OwPp6ARd8od1AhUbQtsg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tony Li <tony1athome@gmail.com>, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Cc: "Jakob Heitz (jheitz)" <jheitz@cisco.com>, "lsvr@ietf.org" <lsvr@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a113e4d2aff680d0563a160ab"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsvr/gdBTCK58V589EvbxAXtD3LjL5RM>
Subject: Re: [Lsvr] Kicking off the LSVR (Link State Vector Routing) charter discussion
X-BeenThere: lsvr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Link State Vector Routing <lsvr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lsvr>, <mailto:lsvr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lsvr/>
List-Post: <mailto:lsvr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lsvr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsvr>, <mailto:lsvr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 22:34:51 -0000

Hi!

The WG can discuss whether the current mechanisms are enough or not.
However, to constrain the initial work to something that can be delivered
in a short timeframe (12-18 months), the charter already talks about
operation within a single “distribution domain”, which is akin to a
flooding domain.  IOW, the current scope is a single area/domain.

Alvaro.

On January 25, 2018 at 3:15:42 PM, Randy Bush (randy@psg.com) wrote:

>>>>> Should LSVR introduce a grouping in the way that OSPF has areas and
>>>>> ISIS has levels?
>>>> to what purpose?
>>> For scalability.
>> i thought that is why we were using bgp.
> That addresses the scalability of update propagation, but the SPF
> operation is still O(n log n) on the size of the area database. If
> there is no abstraction, this will balloon.

does bgp not already provide [too] many mechanisms for scoping
propagation?

>>> The OSPF "areas" concept looks quite easy: just use regular VGP
>>> routes between "areas". The only difference is that an OSPF ABR
>>> straddles the area boundaries, whereas an AS boundary is between 2
>>> ASBRs in BGP.
>>> The ISIS concept of levels could get interesting if duplicated in
>>> BGP SPF. It joins level 1 domains with level 2 links.
>> i am sure we can figure out how to complicate it.
> It actually would be more complicated to not respect the abstractions
> that the base protocol is expecting.

given that the base protocol is bgp, we could list the abstractions it
provides for limiting scope except this margin is too small.

randy

_______________________________________________
Lsvr mailing list
Lsvr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsvr

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email