As am I. Yours Irrespectively,
John Juniper Business Use Only From: Lsr <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2020 5:07 PM To: Acee Lindem (acee) <[email protected]>; [email protected] Subject: Re: [Lsr] LSR WG Adoption Poll for "IS-IS Topology-Transparent Zone" - draft-chen-isis-ttz-11.txt [External Email. Be cautious of content] I see no need for "abstraction at arbitrary boundaries". Areas work just fine. IS-IS already has smooth transition capability for merging/splitting areas. Given both of the points above, I see no value in "smooth transition to/from zone abstraction". If these are the principal distinguishing characteristics of TTZ as compared to area proxy (and I would agree they are), then I see no reason why this solution should be pursued as well. I am therefore opposed to WG adoption of TTZ. Les From: Lsr <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> On Behalf Of Acee Lindem (acee) Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2020 7:17 AM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: [Lsr] LSR WG Adoption Poll for "IS-IS Topology-Transparent Zone" - draft-chen-isis-ttz-11.txt Based on the discussions in the last meeting and on the mailing list regarding draft-chen-isis-ttz-11, the chairs feel that there are enough differences with draft-ietf-lsr-isis-area-proxy-03 and in the community to consider advancing it independently on the experimental track. These differences include abstraction at arbitrary boundaries and IS-IS extensions for smooth transition to/from zone abstraction. We are now starting an LSR WG adoption call for draft-chen-isis-ttz-11.txt. Please indicate your support or objection to adoption prior to Tuesday, September 2nd, 2020. Thanks, Acee and Chris
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
