[Lsr] Re: Another counter-example

[Peter Psenak]

On 03/12/2024 15:50, Tony Przygienda wrote:

unfortunately, you like it or not Peter, this is already deployed reality with multiple operators that won't go away

sure, but are we going to make the flooding algorithm aware of that?

Peter

-- tony

On Wed, Nov 27, 2024 at 11:16 AM Peter Psenak <ppse...@cisco.com> wrote:

    Robert,

    On 27/11/2024 10:32, Robert Raszuk wrote:

    Peter,

    My point was that this should be at least mentioned in
    operational considerations section if dynamic flooding is
    expected to work in mixed networks where some nodes support new
    algorithm and some do not your "regular flooding case".

    you are talking about mixing the manual mesh group with optimized
    flooding. I don't think we want to go that path.

    thanks,

    Peter

    On Wed, Nov 27, 2024 at 10:28 AM Peter Psenak <ppse...@cisco.com>
    wrote:

        Robert,

        On 27/11/2024 10:22, Robert Raszuk wrote:

        Peter,

        I am not sure if what Tony said is a requirement or an
        observation.

        > Note that combining routers that run the elected optimized
        algorithm
        > with routers that do run the regular flooding is not a
        problem.

        Note that static mesh groups can be present today too and
        you can't assume that it is either an optimized algorithm or
        full flooding.

        please do not compare apples with oranges.

        Static mesh groups are manually configured and if not done
        correctly can result in broken flooding. What we are
        discussing here is a dynamic flooding algorithm, not manual
        flooding blocking.

        thanks,
        Peter

        Thx,
        R.


        On Wed, Nov 27, 2024 at 9:58 AM Peter Psenak
        <ppsenak=40cisco....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:

            On 27/11/2024 00:18, Tony Li wrote:
            > A distributed algorithm computing a flooding topology
            must only
            > operate upon nodes running the same algorithm (and
            version). If
            > multiple algorithms (and/or versions) are running in
            the same network,
            > then any given algorithm and version defines a
            subgraph and the
            > algorithm can only optimize flooding within its own
            subgraph. Legacy
            > full flooding must be used between subgraphs of
            different algorithms
            > or versions.

            This is a new requirement for the flooding algorithm
            itself. This does
            not exist with the existing leader based election, as
            that guarantees
            that only one optimized flooding algorithm is ever
            present in the area.
            Note that combining routers that run the elected
            optimized algorithm
            with routers that do run the regular flooding is not a
            problem.

            thanks,
            Peter

            _______________________________________________
            Lsr mailing list -- lsr@ietf.org
            To unsubscribe send an email to lsr-le...@ietf.org

_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list -- lsr@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to lsr-le...@ietf.org