I am in favor of this proposal. Les
> -----Original Message----- > From: Lsr <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Christian Hopps > Sent: Friday, February 01, 2019 4:26 AM > To: [email protected] > Cc: [email protected] > 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 solution (draft-li- > dyanmic-flooding). We do not need to standardize the centralized algorithm. > > - A small change to this work allowed for distributed algorithms and for > outside work on distributed algorithms to continue in parallel. > > - We have another original work that started primarily as a distributed > algorithm > (draft-cc-ospf-flooding-reduction) > > - Finally we also have: > - Cross-pollination of ideas. > - Failed attempts at merging. > - An authors list "Arms-Race". > > Moving forward: > > - During IETF 103 I proposed we have no conflict if we: > > 1) adopt draft-li-lsr-dyanmic-flooding as the base WG document. > 2) have authors of draft-cc-lsr-flooding-reduction work on a distributed > algorithm as they started with. > > - Acee agreed during the meeting (as chair) that this was the best way > forward. We had some agreement form the floor as well. > > - Any good ideas regarding the distribution of a centralized topology can be > debated and added (with appropriate attribution) to the base document > after we adopt one. > > - This is what happens when we adopt a document as WG work, we work on > it. > > - The original authors of the distributed solution can continue to work on > their distributed algorithm in a separate document which would also need > standardization. > > Does anyone see a serious problem with this path forward? > > Thanks, > Chris & Acee. > LSR Chairs. > > Christian Hopps <[email protected]> writes: > > > We've had the authors of the individual conflicting drafts take a shot at > merging their work. > > > > This has failed. > > > > Here is the full history (which I also summarized during IETF103 as well). I > will send a second email discussing this. > > > > - Jan 2, 2018 Publication: draft-li-dynamic-flooding and drfat-li-dynamic- > flooding-isis > > published centralized solution. > > > > - Mar 5, 2018 Publication: draft-cc-isis-flooding-reduction and > > draft-cc-ospf- > flooding-reduction > > published distributed solution. > > - mention of centralized solution asserting it is not good choice. > > > > - IETF 101 (Mar 2018) > > - Video: > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHmT4ytMn4w&list=PLC86T- > 6ZTP5j_HaBNdfPbgxGIp22cnaWS > > - Minutes: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/101/materials/minutes- > 101-lsr-00 > > - draft-li-dynamic-flooding-02 presented (1 author). at IETF 101 > > - Generally well received. > > - draft-cc-ospf-flooding-reduction-00 (4 authors) presented. > > - Serious problems immediately found during presentation -- not fully > baked. > > > > - Mar 18, 2018 draft-li-dynamic-flooding-03 published (1 author) > > - Mar 27, 2018 draft-li-dynamic-flooding-04 published (1 author) > > - Apr 20, 2018 draft-cc-ospf-flooding-reduction-01 revised > > - Jun 28, 2018 draft-li-dynamic-flooding-05 published (2 authors) > > - *SMALL CHANGE TO SUPPORT DISTRIBUTED ALGORITHM*. > > - Does not specify distributed algorithm only how to indicate one in use, > small change. > > > > - Jul 2, 2018 draft-cc-ospf-flooding-reduction-02 published > > > > - IETF 102 (Jul 14, 2018) > > - draft-li-dynamic-flooding-05 presented. > > - draft-cc-ospf-flooding-reduction-02 presented. > > > > - Sep 12, 2018 draft-cc-ospf-flooding-reduction-03 (4 authors) > > - *LARGE CHANGE ADDS NEW CENTRALIZED SOLUTION*. > > > > - Sep 20, 2018 draft-cc-ospf-flooding-reduction-04 (4 authors) > > > > - Oct 21, 2018 draft-li-lsr-dynamic-flooding-00 and -01 (5 authors) > > > > - IETF 103 (Nov 3, 2018) > > > > - Chairs give direction > > > > - draft-li-lsr-dynamic-flooding-05 having come first, being well written > and not > > specifying a distributed algorithm (merely allowing for one) is the > > correct > vehicle > > to adopt as a base document. > > > > - Distributed algorithm work (the original basis for > > draft-cc-ospf-flooding- > reduction) > > should continue as a separate document form the base which would > thus we have no > > conflicts. > > > > - In the meantime the authors try and merge work, this fails. > > > > - Dec 3, 2018 draft-li-lsr-dynamic-flooding-02 (7 authors) > > > > - Dec 10, 2018 draft-cc-lsr-flooding-reduction-00 (4 authors) > > > > - Jan 7, 2019 draft-cc-lsr-flooding-reduction-01 (8 authors) _______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
