Robert,

On 30/11/2021 10:29, Robert Raszuk wrote:
Les,

    */I was just trying to illustrate that prefixes covered by the
    summary could be advertised using existing IGP advertisements even
    when the summary is being advertised. /**/It is still reachability.
    The determination of when to advertise the prefix and when not to is
    still based upon whether the ABR has a path to the prefix based on
    latest SPF calculation./*

    */__ __/*

    */You choose to rename such an advertisement as “liveness” rather
    than “reachability” for no reason that I can see. It then allows you
    claim an “architectural violation” – but this to me is a meaningless
    distraction. /**/I was hoping to get rid of this distraction – but
    no such luck I see./*


You are correct that from ABR it may look like atomic reachability.

But if you look at the bigger picture what triggers this reachability is liveness detection between P and PE routers.

And I guess what really matters is not how we call it - what matters is what truly triggers our protocol actions.


    */[LES:] This wasn’t the point of the example. I wasn’t promoting
    the example as desirable deployment choice. I was only illustrating
    that it is the change in reachability(sic) that is the event. With
    current IGP advertisements we would (of course) stop advertising
    reachability when we do not have a path to a given prefix. The new
    advertisements propose to advertise the loss of reachability to
    destinations which are covered by a summary. That has advantages
    over a withdrawal (the absence of an advertisement)./*


Perhaps. But it also has huge complexity on the clients (src PEs) which now need to bend to use this info. Something which is not in RIB disappears. I recall when you worked on RIB architecture one of the basic primitives was to always communicate protocol to protocol via RIB. Here we are talking about some not so elegant shortcuts. And not only in respect to protocols. Also touching FIB.

we have done the prototype. The changes to consume the pulse and trigger the BGP PIC were very small and simple.


It is perhaps the vendor's secret sauce how you use this new info. But by all means this is not what is today well known operational monitoring practice.

that does not make it wrong, does it?

thanks,
Peter


That is why the ephemeral nature of the proposed advertisements is IMO its disadvantage.

Thank you,
R.


_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr

Reply via email to