Re: [Lsr] 答复: LSR Working Group Adoption Call for "Hierarchical IS-IS" - draft-li-lsr-isis-hierarchical-isis-01

Ajun: I’ll let Tony provide his answer to your question. Let me provide an alternate topology that your example might fit into draft-hares-lsr-grid-ring-convergence-00.txt describes a problem with IGP

Re: [Lsr] Roman Danyliw's Discuss on draft-ietf-ospf-xaf-te-06: (with DISCUSS)

[Author] Roman: Hi! I just uploaded a new version. Please take a look. Thanks! Alvaro. On August 8, 2019 at 6:36:51 AM, Alvaro Retana (alvaro.ret...@futurewei.com) wrote: On August 8, 2019 at 12:26:07 AM, Roman Danyliw via Datatracker

[Lsr] IPR Disclosure Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-lsr-dynamic-flooding

Dear Tony Li, Peter Psenak, Les Ginsberg, Huaimo Chen, Tony Przygienda, Dave Cooper, Luay Jalil, Srinath Dontula: An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled "Dynamic Flooding on Dense Graphs" (draft-ietf-lsr-dynamic-flooding) was submitted to the IETF Secretariat on and

[Lsr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ospf-xaf-te-07.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Link State Routing WG of the IETF. Title : OSPF Routing with Cross-Address Family Traffic Engineering Tunnels Authors : Anton Smirnov

Re: [Lsr] LSR Working Group Adoption Call for "Hierarchical IS-IS" - draft-li-lsr-isis-hierarchical-isis-01

To expand on this a bit, the point of the draft extensions is to add additional levels of hierarchy and use existing mechanisms (leaking, summarization) to have traffic flow up/down the hierarchy. The intent is NOT to bypass the hierarchy. People can use multiple instances and redistribution to

[Lsr] Publication has been requested for draft-ietf-isis-te-app-06

Acee Lindem has requested publication of draft-ietf-isis-te-app-06 as Proposed Standard on behalf of the LSR working group. Please verify the document's state at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-isis-te-app/ ___ Lsr mailing list

Re: [Lsr] LSR Working Group Adoption Call for "Hierarchical IS-IS" - draft-li-lsr-isis-hierarchical-isis-01

Hi Aijun, Les kindly points out that what I’ve suggested here is completely non-standard and requires multiple IS-IS instances. Tony > On Aug 16, 2019, at 9:03 AM, tony...@tony.li wrote: > > Hi Aijun, > >> If, as you stated, we connect R1 and R7 via one link(although we will not >> do

Re: [Lsr] LSR Working Group Adoption Call for "Hierarchical IS-IS" - draft-li-lsr-isis-hierarchical-isis-01

Hey Les, Of course the objective of the draft is clear and I do not think anyone is questioning that. There was however topic of data and control plane congruence requirement and I think we all agreed by now that this is rather required in link state protocol as it is defined today. As to the

Re: [Lsr] LSR Working Group Adoption Call for "Hierarchical IS-IS" - draft-li-lsr-isis-hierarchical-isis-01

Hi Robert, > Of course the objective of the draft is clear and I do not think anyone is > questioning that. There was however topic of data and control plane > congruence requirement and I think we all agreed by now that this is rather > required in link state protocol as it is defined

Re: [Lsr] LSR Working Group Adoption Call for "Hierarchical IS-IS" - draft-li-lsr-isis-hierarchical-isis-01

Hi Aijun, > If, as you stated, we connect R1 and R7 via one link(although we will not do > so, if we design the network hierarchically), how you flood the link > information hierarchically but let the traffic between the two connected L1 > area bypass the L2 area? The link between R1 and R7

[Lsr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-lsr-isis-rfc5306bis-05.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Link State Routing WG of the IETF. Title : Restart Signaling for IS-IS Authors : Les Ginsberg Paul Wells Filename

Re: [Lsr] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-lsr-isis-rfc5306bis-04

Russ - Thanx for the careful review. I have uploaded V5 of the draft which addresses your comments subject to my responses inline. > -Original Message- > From: Russ Housley via Datatracker > Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2019 2:38 PM > To: gen-...@ietf.org > Cc:

Re: [Lsr] LSR Working Group Adoption Call for "Hierarchical IS-IS" - draft-li-lsr-isis-hierarchical-isis-01

Support. > On Aug 12, 2019, at 8:33 AM, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: > > This begins a two week LSR Working Group Adoption Poll for the "Hierarchical > IS-IS" - draft-li-lsr-isis-hierarchical-isis-01. The poll will end at 12:00 > AM UTC on August 27th, 2019. Please indicate your support of

[Lsr] 答复: 答复: LSR Working Group Adoption Call for "Hierarchical IS-IS" - draft-li-lsr-isis-hierarchical-isis-01

Hi, Acee: It’s interesting to extend the ISIS hierarchical in this way. What I considering is the complexity of its deployment in future. Maybe we can discuss/emphasizes on this aspect deep later. Best Regards. Aijun Wang China Telecom 发件人: lsr-boun...@ietf.org

[Lsr] 答复: LSR Working Group Adoption Call for "Hierarchical IS-IS" - draft-li-lsr-isis-hierarchical-isis-01

Hi, Tony: Would you like to elaborate this in more detail to show how you design the control plane hierarchically but the traffic can be transported horizontally? Let’s consider the following graph: If, as you stated, we connect R1 and R7 via one link(although we will not do so, if

Re: [Lsr] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-lsr-isis-rfc5306bis-04

>> Nits: >> >> Section 3.2.3: The lettered paragraphs at the top of the section >> begin with lower case letters, but the lettered paragraphs at the >> top of the section begin with upper case letters. Please be >> consistent. >> > [Les:] Done Cool. >> Section 3.2.3: s/time after which the