[Lsr] Hi, Here are some clarification questions about the flex-algo draft.

Hi, Here are some clarification questions about the flex-algo draft. 1. As described in section 5, in path computation for a flex-algorithm, the node firstly needs to prune the links not included for this flex-algorithm, then run SPF or other algorithm within the pruned topology. If a node

Re: [Lsr] IETF 102 LSR Working Group Call for Agenda Items

Hi, Request a slot to discuss Network Automatic Optimization Based on Dynamic Adjustment of IGP Metrics: Drafts: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hu-lsr-network-automatic-optimization/ Presenter: ZhiBo Hu Duration: 15 mins Thanks! ZHiBo From: Lsr [mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org] On

Re: [Lsr] IETF 102 LSR Working Group Call for Agenda Items

Hi, Request a slot to discuss ISIS extended for PathMTU: Drafts: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hu-lsr-isis-path-mtu/ Presenter: ZhiBo Hu Duration: 10 mins Thanks! ZHiBo From: Lsr [mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Acee Lindem (acee) Sent: Monday, June 18, 2018 9:45 PM To:

Re: [Lsr] Comments on draft-hu-lsr-isis-path-mtu

Hi Les & Acee: Yes, I agree with you, we will merge ISIS & OSPF extensions for Path MTU, and isis will reference RFC 7176. Ths ZhiBo Hu From: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) [mailto:ginsb...@cisco.com] Sent: Monday, July 09, 2018 12:52 PM To: Acee Lindem (acee) ; Huzhibo ; lsr@ietf.org Cc: Da

Re: [Lsr] Working Group Adoption Poll for "OSPF Extension for PrefixOriginator" - draft-wang-lsr-ospf-prefix-originator-ext-01

Support.It is useful for collect cross-area IGP topologies Ths Zhibo Hu From: Lsr [mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of peng.sha...@zte.com.cn Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2019 4:36 PM To: a...@cisco.com Cc: lsr@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Lsr] Working Group Adoption Poll for "OSPF Extension

Re: [Lsr] 答复: WG Adoption Call for draft-li-lsr-dynamic-flooding-02 + IPR poll.

Supports for the adoption of two drafts at the same time, IGP Reduce Flooding still have some problem needs to be solved, for example, how to ensure the reliability of Flooding in a multi-point failure scenario. The way to solve these problems in a distributed and centralized manner may be

Re: [Lsr] 答复: Moving Forward [Re: Flooding Reduction Draft Redux]

Support to promote the centralized and distributed solutions in two separated drafts. Best regards, Zhibo -Original Message- From: Lsr [mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Dongjie (Jimmy) Sent: Monday, February 11, 2019 4:47 PM To: Lizhenbin ; Christian Hopps ; lsr@ietf.org

Re: [Lsr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-lsr-dynamic-flooding-04.txt

Hi authors: Regarding this Draft, I have always had a question, how does dynamic flooding ensure the reliability of Flooding under multiple points of failure. Flooding depends on the consistent LSDB / Flooding SPF tree across the entire network, and the consistent LSDB on the entire

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call for draft-li-lsr-ospfv3-srv6-extensions

Support. Not aware of any undisclosed IPR. Zhibo -- 胡志波 Hu Zhibo Mobile: +86-18618192287 Email: huzh...@huawei.com 发件人：Christian Hopps 收件人：lsr 抄 送：draft-li-lsr-ospfv3-srv6-extensions ;lsr-ads ;Christian Hopps ;Acee

Re: [Lsr] WG Last Call draft-ietf-lsr-isis-srv6-extensions

Support. Not aware of any undisclosed IPR. Zhibo -- 胡志波 Hu Zhibo Mobile: +86-18618192287 Email: huzh...@huawei.com 发件人：Christian Hopps 收件人：lsr 抄 送：lsr-ads ;Christian Hopps ;Acee Lindem (acee) 时 间：2020-01-22 08:15:23

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

Support WG adoption. Thanks, Zhibo Hu 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

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-bonica-lsr-ip-flexalgo-00.txt

Hi. Associating multiple algorithms with a given prefix is an interesting topic, and I think this can simplify the complexity of FlexAlgo. I wonder if the author would consider using cases with multiple algorithms with a given prefix. Thanks ZHibo -Original Message- From: Lsr

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-bonica-lsr-ip-flexalgo-00.txt

, Joel PS: I will admit that it took until an operator described some "interesting" constraints before I understood why one would even do this. On 9/29/2020 11:50 PM, Huzhibo wrote: > Hi. > > Associating multiple algorithms with a given prefix is an interesting topic, >

Re: [Lsr] Flooding Topology Computation Algorithm - draft-cc-lsr-flooding-reduction-08 Working Group Adoption Call

I support this adaption.It propose an algorithm for node to compute a flooding topology.It is useful for reduce flooding. -- 胡志波 Hu Zhibo Mobile: +86-18618192287 Email: huzh...@huawei.com 发件人：Acee Lindem (acee) 收件人：lsr

[Lsr] A question about draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo

Hi Peter: I noticed that draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo-07 adds exclude SRLG TLV. SRLG defines a group of risk-sharing link groups. It is generally used to prevent the primary and standby paths from passing the same risk-sharing link group .I don't know why a group of SRLG links should be excluded

Re: [Lsr] A question about draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo

calculate disjoint paths. Thanks Zhibo Hu From: Alexander Vainshtein [mailto:alexander.vainsht...@ecitele.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 3, 2020 8:19 PM To: Huzhibo ; Peter Psenak (ppsenak) Cc: lsr@ietf.org; draft-ietf-lsr-flex-a...@ietf.org Subject: RE: A question about draft-ietf-lsr-flex-algo Hi Zhibo

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

, 2020 9:24 PM To: Huzhibo ; Aijun Wang ; lsr@ietf.org Cc: Xiaoyaqun Subject: Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt See my response to Aijun... Please provide topologies where the section 6.1 solution doesn't work. Acee On 7/27/20, 10:03 PM

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

:18 PM To: Acee Lindem (acee) Cc: Aijun Wang ; lsr@ietf.org; Huzhibo ; Xiaoyaqun Subject: Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt Hello Acee, I would like to question your assessment that signalling unreachable routes is unnecessary. Imagine

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

, 2020 1:51 AM To: Aijun Wang ; lsr@ietf.org Cc: Huzhibo ; Xiaoyaqun Subject: Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt Speaking as an LSR Working Group member: Asking the WG precisely how to advertise prefix unreachability is the wrong question

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

Lindem (acee) 收件人：Peter Psenak ;Robert Raszuk 抄 送：Aijun Wang ;Xiaoyaqun ;Huzhibo ;Aijun Wang ;lsr 时 间：2020-07-31 00:04:02 主 题：Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt So, how do we define a reachable route - is it any route subsumed by the s

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

. -- 胡志波 Hu Zhibo Mobile: +86-18618192287 Email: huzh...@huawei.com<mailto:huzh...@huawei.com> 发件人：Robert Raszuk 收件人：Huzhibo 抄 送：Acee Lindem (acee) ;Peter Psenak ;Aijun Wang ;Xiaoyaqun ;Aijun Wang ;lsr 时 间：2020-07-31 00:18:27 主 题：Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draf

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

HI Peter： sure，we will cansider all the possible better solution.thanks for your suggestion. zhibo -- 胡志波 Hu Zhibo Mobile: +86-18618192287 Email: huzh...@huawei.com<mailto:huzh...@huawei.com> 发件人：Peter Psenak 收件人：Huzhibo ;Aijun Wang 抄 送

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

Hi peter： On 30/07/2020 14:28, Aijun Wang wrote: > Hi, Peter: > > Aijun Wang > China Telecom > >> On Jul 30, 2020, at 20:00, Peter Psenak wrote: >> >> Hi Aijun, >> >>> On 30/07/2020 13:44, Aijun Wang wrote: >>> Hi, Peter: >>> Currently, we have the following consideration: >>> 1. If not all

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

: huzh...@huawei.com<mailto:huzh...@huawei.com> 发件人：Peter Psenak 收件人：Huzhibo ;Aijun Wang 抄 送：Aijun Wang ;lsr ;Xiaoyaqun 时 间：2020-07-30 21:02:49 主 题：Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt Huzhibo, On 30/07/2020 14:49, Huzhibo wrote:

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call for "IGP Flexible Algorithms (Flex-Algorithm) In IP Networks" - draft-bonica-lsr-ip-flexalgo-01

Hi Peter: If Ti-LFA can protect IP flexalgo, the native IP and SR must share the same algorithm ID. thanks, Zhibo -Original Message- From: Peter Psenak [mailto:ppse...@cisco.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 9, 2020 7:16 PM To: Huzhibo ; Acee Lindem (acee) ; lsr Subject: Re: [Lsr

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call for "IGP Flexible Algorithms (Flex-Algorithm) In IP Networks" - draft-bonica-lsr-ip-flexalgo-01

Hi authors, Here are some comments about IP flexalgo as follows: 1. In Flex-Algo draft, there is description about using fast-rerouting with Flex-Algo for SR-MPLS and SRv6 data plane. It is recommended that similar text be added for IP Flex-Algo. 2. Is Application-Specific Link

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call for "IGP Flexible Algorithms (Flex-Algorithm) In IP Networks" - draft-bonica-lsr-ip-flexalgo-01

Hi Peter: Following this approach, IP and SR Flex-Algo can also be distinguished by using different FA IDs, thus there is no need to treat them as separate applications, and the existing SR FAD TLV can be reused? My suggestion is to have a clear and consistent rule in FA participation, either

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call for "IGP Flexible Algorithms (Flex-Algorithm) In IP Networks" - draft-bonica-lsr-ip-flexalgo-01

[mailto:ppse...@cisco.com] Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 5:59 PM To: Huzhibo ; Dongjie (Jimmy) ; Acee Lindem (acee) ; lsr Subject: Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call for "IGP Flexible Algorithms (Flex-Algorithm) In IP Networks" - draft-bonica-lsr-ip-flexalgo-01 Zhibo, On 11/12/2020 10:39, Huzhibo w

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call for "IGP Flexible Algorithms (Flex-Algorithm) In IP Networks" - draft-bonica-lsr-ip-flexalgo-01

Hi peter: If you think that IP and SR are two applications, which application-specific link attributes should IP flexalgo use? Thanks Zhibo -Original Message- From: Peter Psenak [mailto:ppse...@cisco.com] Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 6:11 PM To: Huzhibo ; Dongjie (Jimmy

[Lsr] 答复: [Idr] WG Adoption for draft-zhu-idr-bgp-ls-path-mtu (11/1/2020 to 11/16/2020)

Hi Les, Acee: Actually we have already discussed about this and reached agreements about two years ago. You may have forgotten. Please find the archives below. https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/C2bhd2ff2UJf4e_Gr-7j2W0g-SU/ I have followed your advice: "there already is a per link MTU

Re: [Lsr] Prefix Unreachable Announcement Use Cases

Hi Tony: In fact, this protection use case protects the SRv6 mid-point. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-chen-rtgwg-srv6-midpoint-protection/. When the SRv6 mid-point fails, the PLR node can perform the next SID operation, which is triggered by FIB miss. However, if there is a summary or

[Lsr] 答复: [Idr] WG Adoption for draft-zhu-idr-bgp-ls-path-mtu (11/1/2020 to 11/16/2020)

Hi les: I agree with you that IGP still has work to do. I think we can leave the work to LSR to complete it, which does not affect the current BGP work. Thank you. Zhibo 发件人: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) [mailto:ginsb...@cisco.com] 发送时间: 2020年11月15日 1:29 收件人: Huzhibo ; Ketan Talaulikar (ketant

Re: [Lsr] LSR WG Adoption Call for "Algorithm Related IGP-Adjacency SID Advertisement"

Hi: I don't support the adoption of this document.Reserve different queue resources for different algorithms is not a existing feature of Flexalgo, I don't think it's appropriate to include it in this document. if needed it should be discussed separately from the per flexalgo adj sid

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Poll for “Using IS-IS Multi-Topology (MT) for Segment Routing based Virtual Transport Network” - draft-xie-lsr-isis-sr-vtn-mt-03

Support the adoption. Zhibo Hu From: Lsr [mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Acee Lindem (acee) Sent: Wednesday, March 3, 2021 7:28 AM To: lsr@ietf.org Subject: [Lsr] WG Adoption Poll for “Using IS-IS Multi-Topology (MT) for Segment Routing based Virtual Transport Network” -

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call for draft-wang-lsr-stub-link-attributes-02

Hi, WG: This draft provides a way to advertise the stub link and their associated attributes. I support its adoption as a co-author. I am not aware of any IPR that related to this draft. Best Regards Zhibo hu -Original Message- From: Lsr [mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of

Re: [Lsr] 【Responses for Comments on PUAM Draft】RE: IETF 112 LSR Meeting Minutes

protection also generates suboptimal paths. Therefore, even if local protection is deployed, speeding up ingress PE convergence is useful. Regards Zhibo From: Lsr [mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Shraddha Hegde Sent: Friday, November 26, 2021 12:49 PM To: Huzhibo ; Aijun Wang ; 'Tony Li' Cc

Re: [Lsr] 【Responses for Comments on PUAM Draft】RE: IETF 112 LSR Meeting Minutes

Hi Shraddha: MPLS egress protection is a FRR mechanism, PUA is a hard convergence mechanism. I don't think there's a conflict between the two solution. Also, as far as I know, MPLS egress protection has not been deployed on a large scale. Thanks Zhibo From: Lsr

Re: [Lsr] 【Responses for Comments on PUAM Draft】RE: IETF 112 LSR Meeting Minutes

Hi, Shraddha: If you punch a hole in the summary, the other area nodes come to know about the mid-point failure.---> Yes, you're right. Once any node knows about the mid-point failure，It can execution local protection by looking up next sid to fix SRv6 Policy reachability. Thanks Zhibo

[Lsr] 答复: 【Responses for Comments on PUAM Draft】RE: IETF 112 LSR Meeting Minutes

if there's a available and safe solution. Regards Zhibo 发件人: Lsr [mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org] 代表 Robert Raszuk 发送时间: 2021年11月26日 17:00 收件人: Huzhibo 抄送: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) ; Gyan Mishra ; Acee Lindem (acee) ; Christian Hopps ; Aijun Wang ; Tony Li ; lsr ; Shraddha Hegde ; Tony Przygienda

Re: [Lsr] LSR WG Adoption Call for SRv6 YANG drafts

I am not aware of any IPR related to the draft. Best Regards, zhibo -Original Message- From: Lsr [mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Christian Hopps Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2021 6:48 PM To: lsr@ietf.org Cc: lsr-cha...@ietf.org; lsr-...@ietf.org; cho...@chopps.org Subject: [Lsr]

Re: [Lsr] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-lsr-ip-flexalgo-04 - "IGP Flexible Algorithms (Flex-Algorithm) In IP Networks"

Hi Ketan: I agree with you. IGP MT is a good precedent. If IPv4 and IPv6 use the same MT, the IPv4 and IPv6 topologies must be the same. The same MT does not define separate topologies or path computation for different data planes. If IPv4 and IPv6 data plane has different topologies, different

Re: [Lsr] Working Group Adoption of "IGP Unreachable Prefix Announcement" - draft-ppsenak-lsr-igp-unreach-prefix-announce-04

From: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) [mailto:ginsberg=40cisco@dmarc.ietf.org] Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2023 10:57 AM To: Huzhibo ; Peter Psenak (ppsenak) ; linchangwang ; Acee Lindem ; lsr Cc: draft-ppsenak-lsr-igp-unreach-prefix-annou...@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Lsr] Working Group Adoption

Re: [Lsr] Working Group Adoption of "IGP Unreachable Prefix Announcement" - draft-ppsenak-lsr-igp-unreach-prefix-announce-04

Hi Les: I think you may have connected something. Existing routers, on receiving a prefix reachability advertisement with a U-Flag described in https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ppsenak-lsr-igp-ureach-prefix-announce/ also will interpret that prefix as being reachable. Both two draft

Re: [Lsr] IPR Poll for Working Group Adoption of "IGP Unreachable Prefix Announcement" - draft-ppsenak-lsr-igp-unreach-prefix-announce-04

Object its adoption. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement/ (PUA) covering all use cases and scenarios in this document, the PUA describes additional more useful use cases and scenarios, including: 1. PUA solves area/domain partition, which is necessary

Re: [Lsr] Working Group Adoption of "IGP Unreachable Prefix Announcement" - draft-ppsenak-lsr-igp-ureach-prefix-announce-04 (Fixed draft name)

Object its adoption. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement/ (PUA) covering all use cases and scenarios in this document, the PUA describes additional more useful use cases and scenarios, including: 1. PUA solves area/domain partition, which is necessary

[Lsr] Data Plane Topology ID

Hi LSR: We submitted a draft of the DataPlane extension Topo ID: https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-li-6man-topology-id-00.txt. This draft sloves the following problem: MT And Flexalgo Shared Addresses Space. RFC5120 defines if the topologies are quality of Service (QoS) partitioned, then the

[Lsr] Data Plane topology ID

Hi 6man and LSR: We submitted a draft of the DataPlane extension Topo ID: https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-li-6man-topology-id-00.txt

Re: [Lsr] Comments on draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement

Peter > -Original Message- > From: Lsr [mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Peter Psenak > Sent: Friday, July 29, 2022 8:33 AM > To: Aijun Wang ; Acee Lindem (acee) > > Cc: Ketan Talaulikar ; Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) > ; > draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucem...@ietf.org; lsr

[Lsr] Question about draft-ppsenak-lsr-igp-ureach-prefix-announce

Hi Peter: Supplement to yesterday's online questions, If a node that does not support IP Flexalgo, which has a default route, should the node process the IP Flexalgo prefix as a UPA? Thanks Zhibo ___ Lsr mailing list Lsr@ietf.org

Re: [Lsr] Handling multiple Extended IS Reachability TLVs for a link

Hi Everyone: I think it is necessary to specify the key of the TLV and the information that needs to be carried repeatedly in this document. I am not sure that everyone has the same understanding of the key. If different vendors have different understandings of the key, there may be

Re: [Lsr] Working Group Last Call for "OSPFv3 Extensions for SRv6" - draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-srv6-extensions-06.txt (Corrected Address)

Hi Aijun, Thanks for your detailed review and please check inline below for responses. From: Lsr [mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Aijun Wang Sent: Friday, August 19, 2022 5:55 PM To: 'Acee Lindem (acee)' ; 'lsr' Cc: draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-srv6-extensi...@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Lsr]

Re: [Lsr] RFC 8362 and LSInfinity

Hi LSR: LSInfinity The metric value indicating that the destination described by an LSA is unreachable. Used in summary-LSAs and AS-external-LSAs I want to clarify the meaning of unreachable in LSifinity, Assume that a node advertise specific route of 1.1.1.1/32, and an aggregate route

Re: [Lsr] IPR Poll Coincident with the Working Group Last Call for "OSPFv3 Extensions for SRv6" - draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-srv6-extensions-06.txt

Hi Acee, I am not aware of any undisclosed IPR that applies to draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-srv6-extensions-06.txt thanks, Zhibo From: Lsr [mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Acee Lindem (acee) Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2022 1:15 AM To: draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-s...@ietf.org Cc: lsr

Re: [Lsr] Question about draft-ppsenak-lsr-igp-ureach-prefix-announce

Hi Peter: Please see inline. > -Original Message- > From: Peter Psenak [mailto:ppse...@cisco.com] > Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2022 11:20 PM > To: Huzhibo > Cc: lsr@ietf.org > Subject: Re: Question about draft-ppsenak-lsr-igp-ureach-prefix-announce > > Hi Z

Re: [Lsr] Question about draft-ppsenak-lsr-igp-ureach-prefix-announce

Peter: > -Original Message- > From: Peter Psenak [mailto:ppse...@cisco.com] > Sent: Friday, August 5, 2022 1:55 PM > To: Huzhibo > Cc: lsr@ietf.org > Subject: Re: Question about draft-ppsenak-lsr-igp-ureach-prefix-announce > > Zhibo, > > On 03/08/2022 21:0

Re: [Lsr] Working Group Last Call for "OSPFv3 Extensions for SRv6" - draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-srv6-extensions-06.txt (Corrected Address)

I support progressing this draft as a co-author. This draft is a basic protocol extension of OSPFv3 for SRv6, which is useful and necessary. From: Lsr [mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Acee Lindem (acee) Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2022 1:17 AM To: lsr Cc:

Re: [Lsr] Slot request for LSR IETF 116

Hi Acee & Yingzhen： I would like to request a TimeSlot,We will update a new version: Draft：draft-hu-lsr-igp-path-mtu Presenter: Zhibo Hu Duration: 10 mins Thanks Zhibo From: Lsr [mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Yingzhen Qu Sent: Wednesday, March 1, 2023 2:37 AM To: lsr-chairs ; lsr

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-hu-lsr-igp-link-mtu-00.txt

et-dra...@ietf.org] > Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 10:00 PM > To: Pengshuping (Peng Shuping) ; xixing (A) > ; Huzhibo > Subject: New Version Notification for draft-hu-lsr-igp-link-mtu-00.txt > > > A new version of I-D, draft-hu-lsr-igp-link-mtu-00.txt has been successfully > s

Re: [Lsr] IETF-116 LSR - IGP extensions for Advertising Offset forFlex-Algorithm

Hi All： I agree with Louis about the IGP flooding performance issues brought by Flexalgo, especially SRv6. In fact, we have made similar analysis. On a network with 1000 nodes, more than eight SRv6 Flexalgos will bring great flooding pressure. In fact, Flexalgo has some other points that

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-wang-lsr-stub-link-attributes (01/05/2024 - 01/19/2024)

Hi Acee: You're right, there are alternatives to address inter-domain link advertisements, and this document attempts to address such issues in a more simplified way, reducing the number of BGP-LS sessions required, or avoid the configurations related to the peering AS domains as

Re: [Lsr] Working Group Last Call for "Applicability of IS-IS Multi-Topology (MT) for Segment Routing based Network Resource Partition (NRP)" - draft-ietf-lsr-isis-sr-vtn-mt-06

By it nature MT is a good candiate for the control plane of NRP, and it is beneficial to reuse existing technology when applicable. The document has limited its scope to providing a small number of NRPs, which can still be useful for some networks. I support the publication of this document.

Re: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-gong-lsr-ospf-unreachable-link (02/23/24 - 03/08/24)

I support the adoption of the draft as a WG document. thanks, Zhibo From: Lsr [mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Yingzhen Qu Sent: Friday, February 23, 2024 1:28 PM To: lsr ; lsr-chairs Subject: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call - draft-gong-lsr-ospf-unreachable-link (02/23/24 - 03/08/24) Hi,