Em sex., 7 de nov. de 2025 às 06:36, Shraddha Hegde <[email protected]> escreveu:
> Renato, > > > > 2 - In Section 1.2.3, step 1.C of the algorithm describes iterating over > all IS nodes two hops away from TN and checking whether each node is on the > shortest path from TN to the LSP originator. How can that check be > performed if the SPT from the perspective of TN is truncated to two hops? > > > > the spt truncated to two hops is only enough for rule one. rule two says > > > > " > > The second stage is simpler, consisting of a single rule: do not > > flood modified LSPs along any of the shortest paths towards the > > origin of the modified LSP. > " > > that does in fact imply a SPT from the view of the originator. anything else > will not lead to a full reduction. Shraddha may chime in since she had good > amount of examples) > > and overflooding. I think she also had an example where flooding could > actually not cover the whole graph if the full SPT from originator is not > computed. > I assume she will answer in here further. > > Yes. In that case, if the forward optimization only needs a truncated SPT > but the reverse optimization requires a full SPT, it would be better if > step 1.b of the algorithm removed the "truncated to 2 hops" part, since a > full SPT is needed anyway. > > > > > > > > <SH> You are right, full SPT can be done and the results reused for second > stage. > > The text in the draft is more tuned towards understanding the algorithm > rather than an optimal implementation > Hi Shraddha, Fair enough. Thank you for the clarification. Best regards, -- Renato Westphal
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
