Well I was actually not talking about homenet efforts, but any small/mid size compute clusters.
See today it is very common for hosts to participate in dynamic routing - simply due to a fact that VMs or PODs want to be dynamically IP reachable when they are created by orchestration. Moreover it is not that uncommon to see flat routing requirement too in today's DC deployments. Systems folks just do not like the additional protocol layers :) So what options do we have - well BGP between TOR and compute seems to be the only option. Then in fabric there is link state or oversold BGP. Then in the former case you have to redistribute BGP to your underlay and if have requirement to separate reachability then at best you need to map communities to ISIS tags at redistribution. Of course for multi-tenancy there is zoo of other hierarchical options. That just brings an observation that if we are spending some effort to get link state operate lighter in densely meshed environments perhaps it does make sense to make it work end to end too. Not that hosts need to know entire topology so they can be happily treated as stubs, but still single protocol operation is a big OPEX advantage. r. On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 1:30 PM Acee Lindem (acee) <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 3/8/19, 7:22 AM, "Lsr on behalf of Christian Hopps" < > [email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: > > > [email protected] writes: > >Robert Raszuk <[email protected]> writes: > >> > >> See TORs are one case .. but there are ideas to run dynamic > protocols to the hosts too. I have heard there was even a volunteer to > write ISIS-lite to be used on hosts :) > > > > I would…. discourage that concept. > > Perhaps Robert is referring to when homenet was considering using > IS-IS instead of a brand new protocol (babel) for use in the homenet. The > proposed solution for very simple devices (e.g. thermostats or anything w/o > much ram etc) was to use the overload bit. This wasn't just for hosts > though, but for very small devices that could still serve as simple router > for a network behind them. > > > https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-mrw-homenet-rtg-comparison-02.txt > > Christian Franke coded up "tinyisis" in 1500 lines of C code. :) > > > https://git-us.netdef.org/projects/OSR/repos/tinyisis/browse/tinyisis.c > > We have " IS-IS Routing for Spine-Leaf Topology" to address resources on a > TOR while still having multiple northbound links. At least in the context > of flooding reduction, I don’t think we need anything IS-IS lite. > > Thanks, > Acee > > > Thanks, > Chris. > > > _______________________________________________ > Lsr mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr >
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
