Hi, Achieving link up microloop avoidance with a local mechanism is only achievable by tweaking flooding (we need to converge locally, then flood local LSP update) which was not well received by the WG, that's why it was removed. The draft focus now on what has already been implemented by vendors and deployed in live networks.
Some other solutions like SR microloop avoidance will provide link up case at the "price" of having a SR-enabled network. Brgds, From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2016 11:03 To: LITKOWSKI Stephane OBS/OINIS Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: question about draft-ietf-rtgwg-uloop-delay-02 Hi Stephane, I find that section "4.4.2. Link up event" of draft-litkowski-rtgwg-uloop-delay-04 has been removed. Does it mean that there is no need for this? Thanks, Deccan _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you.
_______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
