Re: [pim] Suggested text for pim-dr-improvement on relationship to bdr draft

<zhang.zheng@zte.com.cn> Wed, 10 July 2019 08:55 UTC

Return-Path: <zhang.zheng@zte.com.cn>
X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68E6F120124 for <pim@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Jul 2019 01:55:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.197
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.197 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=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 JErcGtgq4emD for <pim@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Jul 2019 01:55:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mxhk.zte.com.cn (mxhk.zte.com.cn [63.217.80.70]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78484120116 for <pim@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Jul 2019 01:55:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mxct.zte.com.cn (unknown [192.168.164.215]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTPS id 2F27BCA3C0A73B4E5A3C for <pim@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Jul 2019 16:55:34 +0800 (CST)
Received: from mse-fl2.zte.com.cn (unknown [10.30.14.239]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTPS id 1C9214AAA79E54EF0FE5; Wed, 10 Jul 2019 16:55:34 +0800 (CST)
Received: from njxapp02.zte.com.cn ([10.41.132.201]) by mse-fl2.zte.com.cn with SMTP id x6A8t3LK087988; Wed, 10 Jul 2019 16:55:03 +0800 (GMT-8) (envelope-from zhang.zheng@zte.com.cn)
Received: from mapi (njxapp02[null]) by mapi (Zmail) with MAPI id mid203; Wed, 10 Jul 2019 16:55:03 +0800 (CST)
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 16:55:03 +0800
X-Zmail-TransId: 2afa5d25a7e720779d91
X-Mailer: Zmail v1.0
Message-ID: <201907101655034311187@zte.com.cn>
In-Reply-To: <CAHANBtLTUSvqfDwHdYMOUaCpaf5k+SHrACn_zEUY=RnO-324mA@mail.gmail.com>
References: CAHANBtLTUSvqfDwHdYMOUaCpaf5k+SHrACn_zEUY=RnO-324mA@mail.gmail.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
From: zhang.zheng@zte.com.cn
To: stig@venaas.com
Cc: pim@ietf.org, xu.benchong@zte.com.cn, mankamis@cisco.com
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=====_001_next====="
X-MAIL: mse-fl2.zte.com.cn x6A8t3LK087988
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pim/Rr9rcCyvjkrV9gu4FKYDK363z6M>
Subject: Re: [pim] Suggested text for pim-dr-improvement on relationship to bdr draft
X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast <pim.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pim>, <mailto:pim-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/pim/>
List-Post: <mailto:pim@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pim-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim>, <mailto:pim-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 08:55:40 -0000

Hi Stig,






Sorry for late response! I missed this email. 


I will add the sentence you mentioned in new version.


Thank you very much!







Best regards,


Sandy







原始邮件



发件人:StigVenaas <stig@venaas.com>
收件人:draft-ietf-pim-dr-improvement@ietf.org <draft-ietf-pim-dr-improvement@ietf.org>;pim@ietf.org <pim@ietf.org>;
日 期 :2019年07月03日 00:38
主 题 :Suggested text for pim-dr-improvement on relationship to bdr draft


Hi

We discussed in the last pim meeting that this and the draft
draft-mankamana-pim-bdr-02.txt should have some text explaining what
is the difference between them, to make it less confusing for people.

What do you think about saying that "This draft allows DR election to
be sticky by not unnecessarily changing the DR when routers go down or
come up. This is done by introducing new PIM Hello options". Both this
draft, and the draft [draft-mankamana-pim-bdr] introduce a backup DR.
The latter draft does this without introducing new options, but does
not consider the sticky behavior.

The other draft should add text explaining the same.

What do you think?

Regards,
Stig