Hi Huaimo:
Thanks for replying, my comments in line prefaced with DA2>
1. The alternate backup path would appear to also require the criteria of
being link diverse with the FT if the goal is to protect against multiple
failures.
[HC]: Can you give some more details about this?
Hi Huaimo:
Replies are in line….prefaced with DA>
1. The alternate backup path would appear to also require the criteria of
being link diverse with the FT if the goal is to protect against multiple
failures.
[HC]: Can you give some more details about this?
[DA] There is a bit
Hi
A couple of quick observations….
1. The alternate backup path would appear to also require the criteria of
being link diverse with the FT if the goal is to protect against multiple
failures.
2. If node failures are considered, I’m not sure what criteria is used to
deem a bac
Hi Tony:
So for my edification/education, this is a general behavior that in the absence
of any specific algorithm is postulated. (?)
The piece I do not quite get is "adding until fixed". Is the working
assumption that things have broken down to the point that there is no
synchronization of
:44 PM
To: David Allan I ; tony...@tony.li
Cc: lsr@ietf.org; Jakob Heitz (jheitz) ; Peter Psenak
(ppsenak)
Subject: Re: [Lsr] Flooding Path Direction
Dave -
IGP flooding on a link is by specification bidirectional.
It is OK if A arbitrarily decides not to initiate flooding an LSP to
neighbor B, but
directionality
of the FT usage of a given link.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2019 4:49 PM
To: David Allan I ; tony...@tony.li
Cc: lsr@ietf.org; Jakob Heitz (jheitz) ; Peter Psenak
(ppsenak)
Subject: RE: [Lsr] Flooding Path Direction
Dave
44 PM
To: tony...@tony.li; David Allan I
Cc: lsr@ietf.org; Jakob Heitz (jheitz) ; Peter Psenak
(ppsenak)
Subject: RE: [Lsr] Flooding Path Direction
But the point that Peter has made needs to be heeded.
Changing IGP flooding to be unidirectional is non-trivial and should not be
done w/o justific
Hi Gents:
The algorithm in draft-allan actually has the notion of upstream, downstream
and both upstream and downstream FT adjacencies. However as a generalized
form is still a WIP and has yet to demonstrate merit against any of the
other approaches on the table, I'd not be looking to suggest a sp
Got it,
thx
-Original Message-
From: Tony Li On Behalf Of tony...@tony.li
Sent: Tuesday, March 5, 2019 3:59 PM
To: David Allan I
Cc: Peter Psenak ; lsr@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Lsr] Open issues with Dynamic Flooding
Hi Dave,
> My understanding of this whole endeavor is t
OK gents, sadly I’m losing the plot here..
My understanding of this whole endeavor is that:
- excessive flooding slows convergence
- so we are seeking to define a reduced flooding topology
- a failure that does not impact an FT adjacency is propagated throughout the
topology and the effects
Support
-Original Message-
From: Lsr On Behalf Of Acee Lindem (acee)
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2019 5:23 AM
To: Christian Hopps ; lsr@ietf.org
Cc: lsr-cha...@ietf.org; lsr-...@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call for draft-li-lsr-dynamic-flooding-02 + IPR
poll.
Speaking as a WG
Makes sense to me, thanks for the clarity...
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Tony Li On Behalf Of tony...@tony.li
Sent: Sunday, February 3, 2019 12:14 PM
To: Robert Raszuk
Cc: Huaimo Chen ; lsr@ietf.org; cho...@chopps.org;
li_zhenqi...@hotmail.com; David Allan I
Subject: Re: [Lsr
With all respect, there are other distributed solutions on the table…
Cheers
Dave
From: Lsr On Behalf Of li zhenqiang
Sent: Sunday, February 3, 2019 1:28 AM
To: Robert Raszuk ; Christian Hopps
Cc: lsr
Subject: Re: [Lsr] Moving Forward [Re: Flooding Reduction Draft Redux]
Hello all,
Agreed
Cheers
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Lsr On Behalf Of Christian Hopps
Sent: Friday, February 1, 2019 4:26 AM
To: lsr@ietf.org
Cc: cho...@chopps.org
Subject: [Lsr] Moving Forward [Re: Flooding Reduction Draft Redux]
Summary of where we are at with dynamic flooding reduction:
-
HI Tony:
Comments in line:
From: Tony Li On Behalf Of tony...@tony.li
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2018 2:13 PM
To: David Allan I
Cc: lsr@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Lsr] On flooding, diameter, and degree
Dave,
Thanks very much for commenting. I’m a bit confused about your column “Receipt
Degree
HI Tony:
Re: draft-allan-lsr-flooding-algorithm….
My draft falls under the “bushy” class of solutions, to borrow your
terminology.
So mapping to your datapoints and translating what I presented in Bangkok to
actual numbers:
Graph Fault free Single FaultReplication Receipt
D
16 matches
Mail list logo
