>> I agree that optimal is probably unknowable. The question then is what >> do we say in the document? How about something about rate limiting? > > yes, something of that nature, with possible config option.
Let me propose that we add something to sections 6.7.5, 6.7.9, and 6.7.11 like: Addition of temporary flooding should be done with caution, as the addition of excessive connectivity to the flooding topology may trigger unwanted behavior. Routers SHOULD add temporary flooding in a rate limited manner, if not configured otherwise. > the trick is that "all" nodes would comply, where we may only need one/subset > to do... This is the addition of one link, and in particular the onus is really on the DIS to drive synchronization. Per your above arguments, I’m comfortable with this. Tony _______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
