Re: [Lsr] LEEF bit behavior) RE: I-D Action: draft-ietf-lsr-dynamic-flooding-01.txt

2019-05-22 Thread Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
Huaimo - Thanx for providing the inspiration for advertising LEEF. The draft is very explicit in saying that LEEF advertisements are for diagnostic purposes only and do NOT alter dynamic flooding state. I think there are good reasons for this. Consider the possibilities when advertised LEEF

[Lsr] LEEF bit behavior) RE: I-D Action: draft-ietf-lsr-dynamic-flooding-01.txt

2019-05-22 Thread Huaimo Chen
Hi Les, Thank you very much for adding the LEEF bit into the draft based on the FT bit for a link. The bit advertised by one end node of the link indicates whether the link is on the flooding topology. Would you mind adding the behavior below for checking and handling the inconsistency

Re: [Lsr] Migration between normal flooding and flooding reduction

2019-05-22 Thread Huaimo Chen
Hi Les, The procedure in the thread is more comprehensive somehow, which includes Option B, the step related to the leader election, which is optional. I put a note in that step, and so on. It seems better to split it into two or more different topics. The description

Re: [Lsr] Migration between normal flooding and flooding reduction

2019-05-22 Thread Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
Robert – What you suggest is actually a form of Option B i.e., simply by altering config on the Area Leader dynamic flooding is enabled/disabled. No need to do anything on any other node. ☺ But, you have reinforced my point – that the draft does support Option B. Les From: Robert Raszuk

Re: [Lsr] Migration between normal flooding and flooding reduction

2019-05-22 Thread Christian Hopps
tony...@tony.li writes: Huaimo, This seems like it’s a job for the NMS/configuration management system and that there are no protocol interactions required. I'm definitely not a fan of using routing protocols for configuration management, so +1 to this. Thanks, Chris. Oh, and yes, we

Re: [Lsr] Migration between normal flooding and flooding reduction

2019-05-22 Thread Robert Raszuk
One may observe that the draft implicitly also supports already option A too. If leader advertises full topology wouldn't it effectively disable dynamic flooding automatically ? At least no NMS or configuration push is required on all 1000s of nodes to go back to full flooding say for the purpose