Hi Stewart I think you are correct based on below.
So the TI-LFA draft even though it has loop preventing mechanisms that can possibly work independently of a separate uLoop avoidance mechanism, that there are cases as we both pointed out that uLoops can form, in those cases for further convergence time optimization a separate uLoop prevention mechanism maybe necessary. So in that case the current reference to the uLoop avoidance draft could apply. However, I do think the uLoop draft needs a lot of work particularly section 3 and is an I-D. So I agree we need to remove any references to the uLoop draft and stating that a separate from TI-LFAs uLoop prevention technology is necessary. The uLoop draft as it exists would be the appropriate draft to be referenced but unfortunately it’s not ready so I don’t think we should reference it. Thoughts ? Thanks Gyan On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 4:27 AM Stewart Bryant <stewart.bry...@gmail.com> wrote: > Just to pick up something that was agreed but was not included in this > summary: we agreed to remove the reference to draft-bashandy in order to > make the discussion on uloop prevention technology neutral. > > - Stewart > > > On 10 Nov 2023, at 09:04, Yingzhen Qu <yingzhen.i...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Also sending the email to SPRING WG in case people are interested. > > > > Hi, > > > > We had a very productive discussion during the side meeting, and the > review comments and open issues have been addressed. > > > > Outcome of the discussion: > > It’s important for the draft to clarify that with ti-lfa, when IGP > starts to reconverge, there is still a possibility for micro-loops. So > customers should be advised to deploy some micro-loop protection mechanisms > to prevent traffic loss. > > > > Action items for authors of the ti-lfa draft: > > • To include text from RFC7490 second paragraph of section 10 > > • To include the text summary in the email thread > > • Change the text in section 6.1 from node to link > > > > Next steps: > > After the draft is updated to address the open issues, Gyan Mishra will > update the OPS Directorate review, and the RTGWG WG Chairs will start the > WGLC of this draft. > > > > If I’m missing something, please let me know or reply to this thread. > > > > Thanks, > > Yingzhen > > _______________________________________________ > > rtgwg mailing list > > rt...@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg > > _______________________________________________ > spring mailing list > spring@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring >
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
