home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
Internet Info 1994 March
/
Internet Info CD-ROM (Walnut Creek) (March 1994).iso
/
inet
/
ietf
/
isis
/
isis-minutes-93mar.txt
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1993-05-21
|
2KB
|
54 lines
Editor's note: Minutes received 4/7/93. These minutes have not been edited
and the attendee list has not been appended.
Reported by Dino Farinacci
Notes from the isis working group meeting at Columbus, Apr 1 1993.
Thurs. 9:30-12:00 IS-IS
Standards progression (integrated IS-IS)
- Proposed standard for over 2 years - what should we do.
- Write an interworking proof.
- Testing all features.
Radia presented IS-IS multicasting
- The scheme she describes was designed in DECNET Phase V but
was taken out.
-- Uses multicast bit in the system-id field of an NSAP.
Packet is routed to area and then distributed across a
multicast tree in the area. (Mutlicast to whole area).
Radia presented NLSP differences from IS-IS
- Latch on to DR so changes are minimized
- Radia proposes a configuration knob to have a priority
increase after a router becomes DR.
Radia presented the multi-area router concept
- A router has connection to two LANs that are in different
areas. The router internally are two virtual routers.
Radia presents how IS-IS can implement multiple levels of hierarchy
- Nested circles can be configured to multiple levels of
abstraction. This allows IS-IS to scale to larger routing
domain sizes.
Discussed the issue about a maximum of 256 LSP fragments
- Discussed increasing the size of the LSP fragment number
from the LSPID.
- Discussion shifted to scaling issues related to injecting
externals into an IGP.
Range of metrics in IS-IS
- Increase metric to 16-bits for internal and 32-bits for external
IS-IS over NBMA WANs
- Radia describes NSAP addresses that have E.164 IDPs where
you can "get routing for free". This can be used for CLNP.
- For non-CLNP protocols, Radia wants to avoid SMDS multicast
because of the coordination required with the phone company.
- Each node knows about a subset of the routers on the WANs. With
transitive closure a DR is elected and responsible for
knowing all nodes on the WAN. The non-DR routers flood LSPs
to the DR only and the DR floods to the rest of the nodes.