option #2
On Monday, August 5, 2024 at 12:31:50 AM PDT, Peter Psenak
<[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Acee,
given that the flooding reduction algorithm can be used independently of
the defined signaling (it can utilize the signaling defined in the
dynamic flooding draft), option #2 make sense to me.
thanks,
Peter
On 02/08/2024 20:06, Acee Lindem wrote:
> The subject draft was adopted as a WG document containing only the flooding
> reduction algorithm (section 2).
>
> Procedures and signaling have been added to the current version allowing
> concurrent operation within an IS-IS area of IS-IS routers running different
> flooding reduction algorithms or no flooding reduction at all (section 1).
>
> WG members are questioning if this extra requirement needs to be met and
> included in this document. There was an extensive discussion during the IETF
> 120 LSR meeting and a MeetEcho show-of-hands poll was taken -
> https://notes.ietf.org/notes-ietf-120-lsr
>
> Please indicate your preference and reasoning amongst the following options
> by August 17, 2024:
>
> 1) The document remains in its current form describing both the
>flooding reduction algorithm signaling/procedures and the new flooding
>reduction algorithm.
> 2) The flooding reduction algorithm and procedures will be split into
>a separate document with its own LSR WG adoption call.
> 3) Some other resolution?
>
> Thanks,
> Yingzhen, Chris, and Acee (LSR Chairs)
> _______________________________________________
> Lsr mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
