Re: [Lsr] LSR WG Adoption Poll for "IS-IS Topology-Transparent Zone" - draft-chen-isis-ttz-11.txt

2020-08-31 Thread Huaimo Chen
Hi Les,

> The question I and others have asked is “what can we do with zones that 
> cannot be done with areas?”.
[HC]: IS-IS TTZ or say Zone is one of a few drafts which experiment/explore 
new ways for scalability. These new ways may be simpler and have some other 
features.

Best Regards,
Huaimo

From: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) 
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2020 6:52 PM
To: Huaimo Chen ; Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) 
; Acee Lindem (acee) 
; lsr@ietf.org 
Subject: RE: LSR WG Adoption Poll for "IS-IS Topology-Transparent Zone" - 
draft-chen-isis-ttz-11.txt


Huaimo –



The question I and others have asked is “what can we do with zones that cannot 
be done with areas?”.



>From the day several years ago when IS-IS TTZ was first presented,  your 
>answer has been “with zones you can hitlessly alter the topological 
>boundaries”.

My response has consistently been “we can already do that with areas”.

If you want to justify zones, you then need to provide some other use case that 
either cannot be done using areas or cannot be done hitlessly.

Continuing to focus on something that can already be done with areas isn’t 
helping you.



   Les





From: Huaimo Chen 
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2020 3:18 PM
To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) ; Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) 
; Acee Lindem (acee) 
; lsr@ietf.org
Subject: Re: LSR WG Adoption Poll for "IS-IS Topology-Transparent Zone" - 
draft-chen-isis-ttz-11.txt



Hi Les,



> It is possible to merge/split areas without adjacency flaps.

[HC]: While an existing area or zone is being abstracted as a single node 
or vice versa, there are the adjacency ups and downs. The areas 
merging/splitting without adjacency flaps has been done before this abstraction 
and will not reduce the service interruption during the abstraction.



Best Regards,

Huaimo



From: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) mailto:ginsb...@cisco.com>>
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2020 5:59 PM
To: Huaimo Chen mailto:huaimo.c...@futurewei.com>>; 
Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) 
mailto:ginsberg=40cisco@dmarc.ietf.org>>;
 Acee Lindem (acee) 
mailto:acee=40cisco@dmarc.ietf.org>>; 
lsr@ietf.org mailto:lsr@ietf.org>>
Subject: RE: LSR WG Adoption Poll for "IS-IS Topology-Transparent Zone" - 
draft-chen-isis-ttz-11.txt



Huaimo –



It is possible to merge/split areas without adjacency flaps.

The technique has been known for many years.

It requires careful planning – but it is quite feasible and has been done.



You cannot justify the need for zones on this basis.



   Les





From: Lsr mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org>> On Behalf Of 
Huaimo Chen
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2020 2:33 PM
To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) 
mailto:ginsberg=40cisco@dmarc.ietf.org>>;
 Acee Lindem (acee) 
mailto:acee=40cisco@dmarc.ietf.org>>; 
lsr@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Lsr] LSR WG Adoption Poll for "IS-IS Topology-Transparent Zone" - 
draft-chen-isis-ttz-11.txt



Hi Les,



> I see no need for “abstraction at arbitrary boundaries”. Areas work just fine.

> IS-IS already has smooth transition capability for merging/splitting areas..



[HC]: The smooth transition capability for merging/splitting areas in IS-IS 
will not reduce the service interruption while an existing area or zone is 
being abstracted as a single node because the adjacency ups and downs.



> Given both of the points above, I see no value in “smooth transition to/from 
> zone abstraction”.



[HC]:  The "smooth transition to/from zone abstraction" will reduce the service 
interruption while an existing area or zone is being abstracted as a single 
node and vice versa.



Best Regards,

Huaimo



From: Lsr mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org>> on behalf of Les 
Ginsberg (ginsberg) 
mailto:ginsberg=40cisco@dmarc.ietf.org>>
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2020 5:06 PM
To: Acee Lindem (acee) 
mailto:acee=40cisco@dmarc.ietf.org>>; 
lsr@ietf.org mailto:lsr@ietf.org>>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] LSR WG Adoption Poll for "IS-IS Topology-Transparent Zone" - 
draft-chen-isis-ttz-11.txt



I see no need for “abstraction at arbitrary boundaries”. Areas work just fine.



IS-IS already has smooth transition capability for merging/splitting areas.



Given both of the points above, I see no value in “smooth transition to/from 
zone abstraction”.



If these are the principal distinguishing characteristics of TTZ as compared to 
area proxy (and I would agree they are), then I see no reason why this solution 
should be pursued as well.



I am therefore opposed to WG adoption of TTZ.



   Les







From: Lsr mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org>> On Behalf Of Acee 
Lindem (acee)
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2020 7:17 AM
To: lsr@ietf.org
Subject: [Lsr] LSR WG Adoption Poll for "IS-IS Topology-Transparent Zone" - 
draft-chen-isis-ttz-11.txt





Based on the discussions in the last meeting and on the mailing list regarding 

Re: [Lsr] LSR WG Adoption Poll for "IS-IS Topology-Transparent Zone" - draft-chen-isis-ttz-11.txt

2020-08-31 Thread Huaimo Chen
Hi Henk,

It seems that IS-IS TTZ should not be complex. The prototype implementation 
of OSPF TTZ  seems simple and easy to operate. The complexity of IS-IS TTZ is 
similar to that of OSPF TTZ. In addition, we will try our best to reduce its 
complexity further.
IS-IS TTZ is one of a few proposals/drafts which explore/experiment new 
ways for scalability.

Best Regards,
Huaimo

From: Lsr  on behalf of Henk Smit 
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2020 12:08 PM
To: Acee Lindem (acee) 
Cc: lsr@ietf.org 
Subject: Re: [Lsr] LSR WG Adoption Poll for "IS-IS Topology-Transparent Zone" - 
draft-chen-isis-ttz-11.txt

I object the introduction of a new major concept, called "zone".
It adds nothing to solve problems we can not already solve.
It just adds unnecessary complexity and technical debt.

(12) In protocol design, perfection has been reached not when there
  is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take
away.

henk.


Acee Lindem (acee) schreef op 2020-08-18 16:16:
> Based on the discussions in the last meeting and on the mailing list
> regarding draft-chen-isis-ttz-11, the chairs feel that there are
> enough differences with draft-ietf-lsr-isis-area-proxy-03 and in the
> community to consider advancing it independently on the experimental
> track.
>
> These differences include abstraction at arbitrary boundaries and
> IS-IS extensions for smooth transition to/from zone abstraction.
>
> We are now starting an LSR WG adoption call for
> draft-chen-isis-ttz-11.txt. Please indicate your support or objection
> to adoption prior to Tuesday, September 2nd, 2020.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Acee and Chris
> ___
> Lsr mailing list
> Lsr@ietf.org
> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Flsrdata=02%7C01%7Chuaimo.chen%40futurewei.com%7C1eebe40e2ab34d2ed03c08d8445a297c%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C637334501365871305sdata=7Al1Hk%2FnR%2B19cbAigxEopXaX4x4bAneLMphQCjZw6c0%3Dreserved=0

___
Lsr mailing list
Lsr@ietf.org
https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Flsrdata=02%7C01%7Chuaimo.chen%40futurewei.com%7C1eebe40e2ab34d2ed03c08d8445a297c%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C637334501365881301sdata=DMbOGdYQyEK9Abyc6TpFaP5P4iU5D7SeMDl69SUMVzY%3Dreserved=0
___
Lsr mailing list
Lsr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr


Re: [Lsr] LSR WG Adoption Poll for "IS-IS Topology-Transparent Zone" - draft-chen-isis-ttz-11.txt

2020-08-31 Thread Dongjie (Jimmy)
I support the adoption of this document.

Best regards,
Jie

From: Lsr [mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Acee Lindem (acee)
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2020 10:17 PM
To: lsr@ietf.org
Subject: [Lsr] LSR WG Adoption Poll for "IS-IS Topology-Transparent Zone" - 
draft-chen-isis-ttz-11.txt


Based on the discussions in the last meeting and on the mailing list regarding 
draft-chen-isis-ttz-11, the chairs feel that there are enough differences with 
draft-ietf-lsr-isis-area-proxy-03 and in the community to consider advancing it 
independently on the experimental track.

These differences include abstraction at arbitrary boundaries and IS-IS 
extensions for smooth transition to/from zone abstraction.

We are now starting an LSR WG adoption call for draft-chen-isis-ttz-11.txt. 
Please indicate your support or objection to adoption prior to Tuesday, 
September 2nd, 2020.

Thanks,
Acee and Chris

___
Lsr mailing list
Lsr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr


Re: [Lsr] LSR WG Adoption Poll for "IS-IS Topology-Transparent Zone" - draft-chen-isis-ttz-11.txt

2020-08-31 Thread Gengxuesong (Geng Xuesong)
Yes, Support.
It is a reasonable technical solution to abstract a zone to a virtual node to 
enhanced scalability.

Best Regards
Xuesong

From: Lsr [mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Acee Lindem (acee)
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2020 10:17 PM
To: lsr@ietf.org
Subject: [Lsr] LSR WG Adoption Poll for "IS-IS Topology-Transparent Zone" - 
draft-chen-isis-ttz-11.txt


Based on the discussions in the last meeting and on the mailing list regarding 
draft-chen-isis-ttz-11, the chairs feel that there are enough differences with 
draft-ietf-lsr-isis-area-proxy-03 and in the community to consider advancing it 
independently on the experimental track.

These differences include abstraction at arbitrary boundaries and IS-IS 
extensions for smooth transition to/from zone abstraction.

We are now starting an LSR WG adoption call for draft-chen-isis-ttz-11.txt. 
Please indicate your support or objection to adoption prior to Tuesday, 
September 2nd, 2020.

Thanks,
Acee and Chris

___
Lsr mailing list
Lsr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr


Re: [Lsr] LSR WG Adoption Poll for "IS-IS Topology-Transparent Zone" - draft-chen-isis-ttz-11.txt

2020-08-31 Thread Lizhenbin
Hi All,

I support the adoption.


Best Regards,

Zhenbin (Robin)

--
李振斌 Li Zhenbin
Mobile: +86-13651017745/+968-91797068
Email: lizhen...@huawei.com

发件人:Acee Lindem (acee) 
收件人:lsr 
时 间:2020-08-18 22:17:38
主 题:[Lsr] LSR WG Adoption Poll for "IS-IS Topology-Transparent Zone" - 
draft-chen-isis-ttz-11.txt


Based on the discussions in the last meeting and on the mailing list regarding 
draft-chen-isis-ttz-11, the chairs feel that there are enough differences with 
draft-ietf-lsr-isis-area-proxy-03 and in the community to consider advancing it 
independently on the experimental track.

These differences include abstraction at arbitrary boundaries and IS-IS 
extensions for smooth transition to/from zone abstraction.

We are now starting an LSR WG adoption call for draft-chen-isis-ttz-11.txt. 
Please indicate your support or objection to adoption prior to Tuesday, 
September 2nd, 2020.

Thanks,
Acee and Chris

___
Lsr mailing list
Lsr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr