> Please describe the use case in the draft rather than simply referring to > multicast distribution. The simple case has been solved and there is no reason > one couldn't use a single multicast topo/RIB (and leverage existing > implementation outside of the IGPs) with multiple fiex algos for different > sources. >
Well, I think your comments are more appropriate in regard to the PIM draft I referenced below. But, I take your point that you would like to see a better discussion of why this functionality is needed. We'll try to address that in the next revision of the draft. Note that we wanted to avoid a circular dependency between drafts. The PIM draft clearly depends on the soft dataplane draft - but the reverse is not true. It's just that the PIM use case is the first defined use case that requires soft dataplane and so motivated the writing of this draft. But we'll try to address your request. Les > -----Original Message----- > From: Acee Lindem <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, August 22, 2025 3:22 PM > To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) <[email protected]> > Cc: lsr <[email protected]>; Peter Psenak (ppsenak) <[email protected]>; > <[email protected]> <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: LSR WG Adoption Poll for "IGP Flex Soft Dataplane" - draft- > ginsberg-lsr-flex-soft-dataplane-01 > > > > > On Aug 22, 2025, at 6:08 PM, Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Acee - > > > > The logical extension to your position would be that there is no need to > define/use flex-algo because everything we can do with flex-algo could be > done with multiple topologies. > > This may be true - but the deployment challenges/costs associated with > using multiple topologies in this way have made it far less appealing for many > use cases. > > > > I would also suggest that you consider the use case described in > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-xz-pim-flex-algo/ - where flex-algo > soft > dataplane is used as an adjunct to a multicast topology - not a replacement. > > I guess your answer to that would be to have "many multicast > topologies"??? > > This would be, of course, possible - but much more difficult/expensive to > deploy. > > Please describe the use case in the draft rather than simply referring to > multicast distribution. The simple case has been solved and there is no reason > one couldn't use a single multicast topo/RIB (and leverage existing > implementation outside of the IGPs) with multiple fiex algos for different > sources. > > Thanks, > Acee > > > > > Les > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Acee Lindem <[email protected]> > >> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2025 2:33 PM > >> To: Acee Lindem <[email protected]> > >> Cc: lsr <[email protected]>; Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) <[email protected]>; Peter > >> Psenak (ppsenak) <[email protected]>; <[email protected]> > >> <[email protected]> > >> Subject: Re: LSR WG Adoption Poll for "IGP Flex Soft Dataplane" - draft- > >> ginsberg-lsr-flex-soft-dataplane-01 > >> > >> Speaking as WG member: > >> > >> I think the requirements for this draft are "soft" given that the only > >> example > >> provided is the multicast distribution which has been satisfied for decades > >> using a separate multicast topology. > >> In short, the draft suffers from "ED" which in this case is "Exemplar > Deficiency". > >> I'm certainly not going to support adoption until I see a more compelling > use > >> case. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Acee > >> > >> > >>> On Aug 22, 2025, at 5:22 PM, Acee Lindem <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> LSR WG, > >>> > >>> The begins the LSR WG adoption call for "IGP Flex Soft Dataplane" - draft- > >> ginsberg-lsr-flex-soft-dataplane-01. Please express your support or > objection > >> on this list prior to Saturday September 6, 2025. > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Acee > > _______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
