Speaking as WG member:
I agree on this and don't believe we need a separate document or a protracted
discussion.
Additionally, I don't think we should worry about anything going on in other
WGs.
Thanks,
Acee
P.S. I'll provide more input to the discussion as well. As luck would have it,
I initiated the discussion and then had a couple more pressing matters
(including the cable company's fiber installation contractor messing up my
irrigation system ;^(
On 8/24/18, 11:04 AM, "Lsr on behalf of tony...@tony.li" <lsr-boun...@ietf.org
on behalf of tony...@tony.li> wrote:
So, going Old Skool here:
Since everyone agrees that this is a reasonable direction, how about we
have a real discussion on the list?
Requirement number 1 is straightforward: a significant reduction in
flooding overhead.
The basis for this requirement is the understanding that in a dense
topology, there is a great deal of redundancy due to flooding, and that it is
this redundancy that supersaturates the control plane.
Do we agree on this?
Tony
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
Lsr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
Lsr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
