Hi Tony, If architecture enforces you to flood metric to topology mappings then you don't have the issue of disconnect of control and mgmt plane.
So far IGPs are very solid in that respect. Much more solid then other protocols. I am a bit surprised we are ready to relax this and lower the bar here to permit such mapping to be mgmt config driven. Maybe definition of FAD should be revisited and defined in one place and flooded ? Thx, R. On Sat, Jul 31, 2021 at 12:54 AM Tony Li <tony...@tony.li> wrote: > > Robert, > > > > IMO it is a control plane role to at least detect such inconsistency. > > > I understand the desire and I sympathize, but the architecture is not set > up for that. The management plane has the information, the control plane > does not. Detecting inconsistencies would also require that the control > plane understand the (if you’ll pardon the buzzword) intent of the network > administrator. > > The history of software engineering supports this: trying to detect > inconsistencies when you have less information is bound to be inadequate. > > IS-IS makes a very poor test suite for management plane correctness. > > Tony > >
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list Lsr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
