I strongly support the adoption of the IS-IS TTZ draft. For the large scale network, if we just run the IS-IS in a large area, the LSDB will be very large. In addition, the convergence time will last for a long time. But TTZ is a good way to reduce the network size and the number of the Link state can be reduced largely.
BR, Rouxin ________________________________ From: Lsr <lsr-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of reta Yang <reta.y...@outlook.com> Sent: Monday, July 13, 2020 8:20 PM To: lsr@ietf.org <lsr@ietf.org> Subject: Re: [Lsr] Request WG adoption of TTZ I support adoption of the IS-IS TTZ draft. It is very useful for the large network with abstracting a zone to a single virtual node. The size of the LSDB can be reduced dramatically. best, Reta ________________________________ From: Lsr <lsr-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of Toy, Mehmet <mehmet.toy=40verizon....@dmarc.ietf.org> Sent: Monday, July 13, 2020 8:06 AM To: lsr@ietf.org <lsr@ietf.org> Cc: lsr-cha...@ietf.org <lsr-cha...@ietf.org> Subject: Re: [Lsr] Request WG adoption of TTZ I support adoption of the IS-IS TTZ draft. Mehmet
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list Lsr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
