In the past, I have supported the WG adoption and progression of this draft, 
which, prior to V4, has confined itself to defining a flooding algorithm 
designed to greatly reduce redundant flooding in highly meshed topologies.

V4 of the draft, in addition to defining the optimized flooding algorithm, has 
introduced a new infrastructure to control what optimized flooding algorithms 
are in use in a given network. This is an alternative to the control mechanism 
defined in https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsr-dynamic-flooding/

While discussion of an alternative to the control mechanism defined by the 
dynamic-flooding draft is certainly a topic appropriate for the LSR WG to 
consider, coupling this with the definition of a specific algorithm is highly 
inappropriate for multiple reasons.

1)Any control mechanism, whether that defined in the dynamic flooding draft or 
an alternative proposal, is logically independent from the algorithms which 
might be deployed using the control mechanism.
Indeed, even disptflood-04 allows that the algorithm defined in the draft could 
be enabled using the control mechanism defined by the dynamic-flooding draft.
It therefore is inappropriate for the control mechanism and a specific 
algorithm to be coupled into a single draft.
(NOTE that the dynamic-flooding draft confined itself to only defining the 
control mechanism.)

2)Adoption of the distoptflood draft was approved by the WG based on the scope 
of the work being definition of an optimized flooding algorithm.
The WG never approved adoption of the definition an alternative optimized 
flooding control mechanism.
Introducing definition of a new control mechanism into the existing draft 
expands the scope of the draft well beyond that which was approved by the WG 
adoption.
As I stated above, discussion of an alternative control mechanism for enabling 
optimized flooding algorithms is an appropriate topic for the WG to consider, 
but the authors of distoptflood have usurped the WG process by introducing this 
major change in scope without providing the WG an opportunity to consider the 
additional work.

I call upon the authors of draft-ietf-lsr-distoptflood-04 to restore the 
original scope of the draft to defining the optimized flooding algorithm by 
removing discussion of the alternative control mechanism.

If the authors wish to propose an alternative control mechanism for deploying 
optimized flooding algorithms, I encourage them to do so by writing a new draft 
whose scope is confined to the definition of the new control mechanism.

Thanx.

   Les


_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to