FWIW, this use of IS-IS was not adopted by homenet, which is why we now have 
babel wg.

Thanks,
Chris.

Acee Lindem (acee) <a...@cisco.com> writes:

On 3/8/19, 7:22 AM, "Lsr on behalf of Christian Hopps" <lsr-boun...@ietf.org on 
behalf of cho...@chopps.org> wrote:


    tony...@tony.li writes:
    >Robert Raszuk <rob...@raszuk.net> 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
Lsr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
Lsr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr

Reply via email to