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

2019-03-04 Thread Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
Huaimo – Some responses inline. From: Lsr On Behalf Of Huaimo Chen Sent: Monday, March 04, 2019 8:16 PM To: Tony Li Cc: lsr@ietf.org; Christian Hopps ; Acee Lindem (acee) Subject: Re: [Lsr] Moving Forward [Re: Flooding Reduction Draft Redux] Hi Tony, >From: Tony Li [mailto:tony1

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

2019-03-04 Thread Huaimo Chen
Hi Tony, >From: Tony Li [mailto:tony1ath...@gmail.com] >Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2019 12:32 AM >To: Huaimo Chen >Cc: Peter Psenak ; Acee Lindem (acee) ; >Christian Hopps >; lsr@ietf.org >Subject: Re: [Lsr] Moving Forward [Re: Flooding Reduction Draft Redux] > &

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

2019-02-20 Thread Tony Li
Hi Huaimo, > The way in which the flooding topology converges in the centralized > mode/solution is different from > that in the distributed mode/solution. In the former, after receiving the > link states for the failures, > the leader computes a new flooding topology and floods it to every

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

2019-02-20 Thread Huaimo Chen
Hi Peter, >-Original Message- >From: Peter Psenak [mailto:ppse...@cisco.com] >Sent: Monday, February 18, 2019 10:39 AM >To: Huaimo Chen ; Acee Lindem (acee) ; >Christian >Hopps ; lsr@ietf.org >Subject: Re: [Lsr] Moving Forward [Re: Flooding Reduction Draft Redux] &

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

2019-02-18 Thread Peter Psenak
Lindem (acee) ; Christian Hopps ; lsr@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Lsr] Moving Forward [Re: Flooding Reduction Draft Redux] Hi Huaimo, On 03/02/2019 17:58 , Huaimo Chen wrote: Hi Acee, I agree with you on keeping the signaling for two modes. The other parts for the distributed solution need

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

2019-02-18 Thread Huaimo Chen
Hi Peter, >-Original Message- >From: Peter Psenak [mailto:ppse...@cisco.com] >Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2019 2:30 AM >To: Huaimo Chen ; Acee Lindem (acee) ; >Christian Hopps ; lsr@ietf.org >Subject: Re: [Lsr] Moving Forward [Re: Flooding Reduction Draft Redux] >

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

2019-02-15 Thread Acee Lindem (acee)
ay, February 14, 2019 2:30 AM > To: Huaimo Chen ; Acee Lindem (acee) > ; Christian Hopps ; lsr@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Lsr] Moving Forward [Re: Flooding Reduction Draft Redux] > > Hi Huaimo, > > On 13/02/20

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

2019-02-14 Thread Acee Lindem (acee)
ry 14, 2019 2:30 AM > To: Huaimo Chen ; Acee Lindem (acee) > ; Christian Hopps ; lsr@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Lsr] Moving Forward [Re: Flooding Reduction Draft Redux] > > Hi Huaimo, > > On 13/02/2019 22:50 , Huaimo Chen wrote: > > Hi Pete

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

2019-02-14 Thread John E Drake
[mailto:ppse...@cisco.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2019 4:58 AM > > To: Huaimo Chen ; Acee Lindem (acee) > > ; Christian Hopps ; lsr@ietf.org > > Subject: Re: [Lsr] Moving Forward [Re: Flooding Reduction Draft Redux] > > > > Hi Huaimo, > > &g

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

2019-02-13 Thread Peter Psenak
Hopps ; lsr@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Lsr] Moving Forward [Re: Flooding Reduction Draft Redux] Hi Huaimo, On 03/02/2019 17:58 , Huaimo Chen wrote: Hi Acee, I agree with you on keeping the signaling for two modes. The other parts for the distributed solution need to be removed. optimized

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

2019-02-13 Thread Huaimo Chen
3, 2019 11:45 AM > *To:* Huaimo Chen ; Christian Hopps > ; lsr@ietf.org > *Subject:* Re: [Lsr] Moving Forward [Re: Flooding Reduction Draft > Redux] > > > > Hi Huaimo, > > > > See inline. > > > > *From: *Lsr mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org>> o

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

2019-02-06 Thread Robert Raszuk
Hi Peter, Many thx for your comment. What I had in mind here was use of multi instance (=2) over very reach physical topologies. So when we construct flooding graph for each such instance - even in centralized mode - the intention was to avoid flooding to take common links (just to reduce the

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

2019-02-06 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Robert, On 03/02/2019 21:37 , Robert Raszuk wrote: I fully agree and support proceeding with draft-li-dyanmic-flooding and to include protocol extensions in it for centralized topology propagation as well as basic hooks like "execute dynamic protocol number X" for distributed calculations.

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

2019-02-06 Thread Peter Psenak
imo *From:* Acee Lindem (acee) [mailto:a...@cisco.com] *Sent:* Sunday, February 3, 2019 11:45 AM *To:* Huaimo Chen ; Christian Hopps ; lsr@ietf.org *Subject:* Re: [Lsr] Moving Forward [Re: Flooding Reduction Draft Redux] Hi Huaimo, See inline. *From: *Lsr mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org>> on

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

2019-02-04 Thread Acee Lindem (acee)
I agree totally with Chris on these points. Furthermore, the choices that operators will have are with the flooding algorithms. We need work on the generalized signaling in order to allow the algorithm work to proceed. Thanks, Acee On 2/4/19, 8:21 AM, "Lsr on behalf of Christian Hopps"

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

2019-02-04 Thread Christian Hopps
Aijun Wang writes: Hi, Christian: Based on your information, it is more fair to adopt these two drafts as WG documents at the same time. The reasons are the followings: 1. The centralized and distributed modes don’t conflict with each other. Anyone can contribute their thoughts on them at

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

2019-02-03 Thread Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
., we do not support MT specific flooding) HTH Les From: Lsr On Behalf Of Robert Raszuk Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2019 12:37 PM To: Tony Li Cc: Huaimo Chen ; cho...@chopps.org; David Allan I ; li_zhenqi...@hotmail.com; lsr@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Lsr] Moving Forward [Re: Flooding

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

2019-02-03 Thread David Allan I
] Moving Forward [Re: Flooding Reduction Draft Redux] I think that this discussion would be greatly clarified if we clearly separated the discussion between a) the algorithm for computing the flooding topology, and b) the signaling to indicate how to proceed. I think that we are all in agreement

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

2019-02-03 Thread Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
Re: [Lsr] Moving Forward [Re: Flooding Reduction Draft Redux] > > > I think that this discussion would be greatly clarified if we clearly > separated > the discussion between > > a) the algorithm for computing the flooding topology, and > b) the signaling to indic

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

2019-02-03 Thread Robert Raszuk
I fully agree and support proceeding with draft-li-dyanmic-flooding and to include protocol extensions in it for centralized topology propagation as well as basic hooks like "execute dynamic protocol number X" for distributed calculations. However one may observe that separate distributed

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

2019-02-03 Thread tony . li
I think that this discussion would be greatly clarified if we clearly separated the discussion between a) the algorithm for computing the flooding topology, and b) the signaling to indicate how to proceed. I think that we are all in agreement that the algorithms can and should be separated

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

2019-02-03 Thread Robert Raszuk
> The former will have all the good parts for the centralized solution, and the latter will have all the good parts for the distributed solution. And in your view which draft should contain required protocol extensions to accommodate both solutions ? Or are you suggesting that we should have

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

2019-02-03 Thread Huaimo Chen
Subject: Re: [Lsr] Moving Forward [Re: Flooding Reduction Draft Redux] Hi Huaimo, See inline. From: Lsr mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org>> on behalf of Huaimo Chen mailto:huaimo.c...@huawei.com>> Date: Saturday, February 2, 2019 at 12:27 AM To: Christian Hopps mailto:cho...@chopps.

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

2019-02-03 Thread Huaimo Chen
...@chopps.org Cc: lsr@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Lsr] Moving Forward [Re: Flooding Reduction Draft Redux] With all respect, there are other distributed solutions on the table… Cheers Dave From: Lsr mailto:lsr-boun...@ietf.org>> On Behalf Of li zhenqiang Sent: Sunday, February 3, 2019 1

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

2019-02-03 Thread Acee Lindem (acee)
Hi Huaimo, See inline. From: Lsr on behalf of Huaimo Chen Date: Saturday, February 2, 2019 at 12:27 AM To: Christian Hopps , "lsr@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Lsr] Moving Forward [Re: Flooding Reduction Draft Redux] Hi Everyone, We proposed the distributed solution first, and Ton

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

2019-02-03 Thread Abdussalam Baryun
On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 11:06 AM Aijun Wang wrote: > Hi, Christian: > > Based on your information, it is more fair to adopt these two drafts as WG > documents at the same time. The reasons are the followings: > 1. The centralized and distributed modes don’t conflict with each other. > Anyone can

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

2019-02-02 Thread Robert Raszuk
Sound like best plan fwd. Thx, R. On Fri, Feb 1, 2019, 13:26 Christian Hopps > Summary of where we are at with dynamic flooding reduction: > > - We have a well written original work that came first and described the > problems as well as a TLVs to allow for a centralized solution >

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

2019-02-02 Thread Aijun Wang
Hi, Christian: Based on your information, it is more fair to adopt these two drafts as WG documents at the same time. The reasons are the followings: 1. The centralized and distributed modes don’t conflict with each other. Anyone can contribute their thoughts on them at their interests. 2. They

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

2019-02-01 Thread Huaimo Chen
@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: - We have a well written original work that came first and described the problems as well as a TLVs to allow for a centralized

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

2019-02-01 Thread Jeff Tantsura
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: >> >> - We have a well written original work that came first and descr

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

2019-02-01 Thread Naiming Shen (naiming)
Support the proposal. Regards, - Naiming > On Feb 1, 2019, at 4:25 AM, Christian Hopps wrote: > > > Summary of where we are at with dynamic flooding reduction: > > - We have a well written original work that came first and described the > problems as well as a TLVs to allow for a

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

2019-02-01 Thread Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
I am in favor of this proposal. Les > -Original Message- > From: Lsr On Behalf Of Christian Hopps > Sent: Friday, February 01, 2019 4:26 AM > To: lsr@ietf.org > Cc: cho...@chopps.org > Subject: [Lsr] Moving Forward [Re: Flooding Reduction Draft Redux] > >

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

2019-02-01 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Chris, sounds good to me. thanks, Peter On 01/02/2019 13:25 , Christian Hopps wrote: Summary of where we are at with dynamic flooding reduction: - We have a well written original work that came first and described the problems as well as a TLVs to allow for a centralized solution

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

2019-02-01 Thread David Allan I
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

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

2019-02-01 Thread Tony Li
ruary 1, 2019 7:26 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: >> >> - We have a well written original work

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

2019-02-01 Thread John E Drake
Chris & Acee, This looks fine to me. Yours Irrespectively, John > -Original Message- > From: Lsr On Behalf Of Christian Hopps > Sent: Friday, February 1, 2019 7:26 AM > To: lsr@ietf.org > Cc: cho...@chopps.org > Subject: [Lsr] Moving Forward [Re: Flooding

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

2019-02-01 Thread Christian Hopps
Summary of where we are at with dynamic flooding reduction: - We have a well written original work that came first and described the problems as well as a TLVs to allow for a centralized solution (draft-li-dyanmic-flooding). We do not need to standardize the centralized algorithm. - A small