Hi Huaimo,
From: Huaimo Chen <huaimo.c...@futurewei.com>
Date: Friday, June 5, 2020 at 9:03 PM
To: Acee Lindem <a...@cisco.com>, "lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] Flooding Topology Computation Algorithm -
draft-cc-lsr-flooding-reduction-08 Working Group Adoption Call
Hi Acee,
Thank you very much for your valuable comments.
My answers/explanations are inline below.
Best Regards,
Huaimo
________________________________
From: Lsr <lsr-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of Acee Lindem (acee)
<acee=40cisco....@dmarc.ietf.org>
Sent: Friday, June 5, 2020 12:52 PM
To: lsr@ietf.org <lsr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] Flooding Topology Computation Algorithm -
draft-cc-lsr-flooding-reduction-08 Working Group Adoption Call
Speaking as WG Member:
Hi Authors,
I have a couple technical comments on the draft.
1. The algorithm only computes a single graph with single path to each
node. While I-D.ietf-lsr-dynamic-flooding failure and computation of an updated
flooding topology, many of the other algorithms (both draft and proprietary)
attempt to compute two or more paths to each node.
[HC]: The flooding topology (or say a graph) computed by the algorithm has at
least two paths to each node. At step 4 of the algorithm on page 5 of the
draft, for each node B that has only one path to it on the flooding topology
(i.e., the Degree of node B is one) , another path is added to it. Thus the
final flooding topology (or say graph) computed by the algorithm has two or
more paths to every node.
Ok – I see this now.
2. Since this algorithm is slated for use as a distributed algorithm, all
routers in the area must use the same value for MaxD or they may compute
different flooding topologies. This is cannot be guaranteed by a single
algorithm IANA value unless we allow some number of algorithm specific
parameters to be advertised by the area leader (which might not be a bad idea).
[HC]: You are right. All the routers must use the same value for MaxD. We will
update the draft for this accordingly. For now, MaxD has an initial value of 3
(i.e., every router uses this initial value of 3 for MaxD). The algorithm
increases MaxD by one and restarts to compute the flooding topology with this
new MaxD if it can not compute a flooding topology with the old MaxD. After
some iterations in some cases, the flooding topology is computed. It is a good
idea to pass some parameters from the area leader to every router when the
leader advertises the algorithm number to every router. MaxD can be one of the
parameters.
3. Similarly, the constraints in section 4.2 must be applied uniformly
and different constraints would require new IANA algorithm allocation.
[HC]: You are right. All the routers must use the same constraints. A new (or
different) set of constraints need a new algorithm number. We will update the
draft for this accordingly.
I see you’ve updated this in the latest.
Thanks,
Acee
Thanks,
Acee
From: Lsr <lsr-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of "Acee Lindem (acee)"
<acee=40cisco....@dmarc.ietf.org>
Date: Friday, May 15, 2020 at 3:40 PM
To: "lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>
Subject: [Lsr] Flooding Topology Computation Algorithm -
draft-cc-lsr-flooding-reduction-08 Working Group Adoption Call
This begins a 3 week (due to holidays) WG adoption call for the “Flooding
Topology Computation Algorithm” draft. Please issue your support or objection
to this list by 11:59 PM, UTC on June 5th, 2020. Here is a URL for your
convenience.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-cc-lsr-flooding-reduction/<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fdraft-cc-lsr-flooding-reduction%2F&data=02%7C01%7Chuaimo.chen%40futurewei.com%7C1a7e82ec42fa40a9ad8e08d80970ea4c%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C637269727959858751&sdata=eG3iR27JyxGL6qCsqlMow47twBhMpf0%2BsgJo6Q9hBJg%3D&reserved=0>
Thanks,
Acee
_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
Lsr@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
