Hi Gyan,

Gyan> I know we are trying to adopt an flooding algorithm
and from my reading up on all proposed algorithms, the dynamic flooding seems 
to be geared towards Data Center  partial mesh high x ECMP leaf spine 
architecture, where redundant flooding is problematic using either centralized 
area leader or distributed flooding using same dynamic algorithm,  versus the 
call for adoption flood reduction algorithm seems to geared towards full mesh 
but from what I can tell would not be the preferred for clos multi tier DC leaf 
spine topology with high x ECMP paths.

[HC]: The algorithm in the call for adoption is also for (or say, gear towards) 
clos multi tier DC leaf spine topology with high x ECMP paths. In the Appendix 
of the draft, a full mess example topology of 5 nodes is used to illustrate the 
steps of the algorithm in some details. Using this topology is for easily 
"drawing" it and illustrating the steps of the algorithm. "Drawing" a clos 
multi tier DC leaf spine topology high x ECMP paths to illustrate the algorithm 
in details is very hard in the draft.

Best Regards,
Huaimo
________________________________
From: Gyan Mishra <hayabusa...@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, May 24, 2020 6:29 PM
To: Sarah Chen <sarahc...@arista.com>; tony...@tony.li <tony...@tony.li>
Cc: Acee Lindem (acee) <a...@cisco.com>; Huaimo Chen 
<huaimo.c...@futurewei..com>; lsr@ietf.org <lsr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] Flooding Topology Computation Algorithm - 
draft-cc-lsr-flooding-reduction-08 Working Group Adoption Call

Hi Acee

Do you know if the dynamic flooding algorithm discussed during interim ietf by 
Sarah and Toni is the same as the one implemented by Cisco on Nexus platform or 
is Cisco’s Dynamic flooding a proprietary implementation?

Cisco’s flooding algorithm does seem almost identical to dynamic flooding..

Cisco Dynamic flooding - Nexus 9k

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/switches/nexus-9000-series-switches/white-paper-c11-743015.html<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cisco.com%2Fc%2Fen%2Fus%2Fproducts%2Fcollateral%2Fswitches%2Fnexus-9000-series-switches%2Fwhite-paper-c11-743015.html&data=02%7C01%7Chuaimo.chen%40futurewei.com%7C427cee154ea74148fc8f08d80031f917%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C637259561920543212&sdata=qVG4uwYPelL1syGzMViZSvOodKoWy2dlL1AyZ%2BljmB0%3D&reserved=0>


Dynamic Flooding - Arista - Sarah & Toni

https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-chen-lsr-dynamic-flooding-algorithm-00.html<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf..org%2Fid%2Fdraft-chen-lsr-dynamic-flooding-algorithm-00.html&data=02%7C01%7Chuaimo.chen%40futurewei.com%7C427cee154ea74148fc8f08d80031f917%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C637259561920553208&sdata=v400uLAa%2Fu3RwJlHfYhplTzR4sXVwMpCZA%2B%2BSM6adgI%3D&reserved=0>

Flood reduction- H Chen - WG adoption pending

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-cc-lsr-flooding-reduction-08<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fhtml%2Fdraft-cc-lsr-flooding-reduction-08&data=02%7C01%7Chuaimo.chen%40futurewei.com%7C427cee154ea74148fc8f08d80031f917%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C637259561920553208&sdata=ZA%2F1DXQYGsbJHynkM5V8bj6Y5VnuwM%2FHftO02nlmzLk%3D&reserved=0>


I know we are trying to adopt an flooding algorithm
and from my reading up on all proposed algorithms, the dynamic flooding seems 
to be geared towards Data Center  partial mesh high x ECMP leaf spine 
architecture, where redundant flooding is problematic using either centralized 
area leader or distributed flooding using same dynamic algorithm,  versus the 
call for adoption flood reduction algorithm seems to geared towards full mesh 
but from what I can tell would not be the preferred for clos multi tier DC leaf 
spine topology with high x ECMP paths.

Why would we not want to adopt the best algorithm that is best for both full 
mesh and non full mesh leaf spine topology algorithm that works for all 
physical topologies and adopt that draft.

Unless a one size fits all won’t work I would like to understand why one best 
solution draft we come up with for an FT algorithm for all possible physical 
topologies cannot be picked for WG adoption.

Why would we want to adopt multiple flooding algorithms?

Gyan

On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 4:43 PM Gyan Mishra 
<hayabusa...@gmail.com<mailto:hayabusa...@gmail.com>> wrote:


On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 9:02 PM <tony...@tony.li<mailto:tony...@tony.li>> wrote:

Hi Gyan,

I think with clos spine leaf the mesh is much more intensive and problematic 
with ECMP then a circular topology nodal mesh that results in duplicate 
redundant flooding that slows down convergence.  With spine leaf it’s like an X 
horizontal width axis and then depth is spine to leaf links.  With spine leaf 
as you grow sideways and the spine expand the redundant ECMP grows and 
redundant flooding grows exponentially and is much worse then circular nodal 
mesh.

One very nice thing about dynamic flooding is that it computes a flooding 
topology at the node level.  If the adjacency between A and B is on the 
flooding topology, then any single link between them may be used for flooding.  
If you have 128 way parallel links, this is an immediate 128x improvement in 
flooding overhead.  What’s more, A and B do not need to agree on which link 
they are using and can use different links, resulting in an asymmetric 
situation, without any loss of correctness or performance.

   Gyan>. Agreed.  The dynamic flooding really helps with X way ECMP prevalent 
in high density data center clos multi tier leaf spine parial mesh topologies 
that scale massive bandwidth breadth wise horizontally for E-W flows..

Regards,
Tony

--

[http://ss7.vzw.com/is/image/VerizonWireless/vz-logo-email]<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.verizon.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Chuaimo.chen%40futurewei.com%7C427cee154ea74148fc8f08d80031f917%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C637259561920563199&sdata=hZ4%2BnucAFIcZGAaq3Tx%2FnmLMuEP63mHgoIPhvNTjW6s%3D&reserved=0>

Gyan Mishra

Network Solutions Architect

M 301 502-1347
13101 Columbia Pike
Silver Spring, MD

--

[http://ss7.vzw.com/is/image/VerizonWireless/vz-logo-email]<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.verizon.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Chuaimo.chen%40futurewei.com%7C427cee154ea74148fc8f08d80031f917%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C637259561920573196&sdata=oxuHfFd0YTOLZPTeLYMIEAuHzJhzNsjkPyjO8DqgFkA%3D&reserved=0>

Gyan Mishra

Network Solutions Architect

M 301 502-1347
13101 Columbia Pike
Silver Spring, MD

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

Reply via email to