1 / 5

Challenges and Solutions in Multilevel TRILL with IS-IS Networking

This document explores the complexities of implementing multilevel TRILL with IS-IS (Intermediate System to Intermediate System). It delves into issues around unique nickname allocation and the implications for MAC learning tables, broadcast traffic, and routing. Key challenges include ensuring that R1 recognizes and manages level-specific Link State PDU (LSP) records and controls nickname availability across distinct areas. Solutions discussed involve Rbridge coordination and prioritization strategies for effective nickname management, ensuring seamless integration within different networking levels.

cleary
Télécharger la présentation

Challenges and Solutions in Multilevel TRILL with IS-IS Networking

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Multilevel TRILL-IS-IS Radia Perlman Radia.perlman@intel.com

  2. What might stop scaling? • 16-bit nickname • MAC learning table • Broadcast traffic • IS-IS computation

  3. Multilevel IS-IS • IS-IS has the capability of multilevels • What issues might TRILL introduce? • nicknames

  4. Nicknames • Must be unique • R1 only sees LSPs at R1’s level • So • Need to allocate a piece of nickname space for each area (including level 2 “area”) • Need to make sure Rbridges in an area know which nicknames they can choose • Need to make sure Rbridges can route to foreign nicknames

  5. Some ideas • Have highest priority border Rbridge R1 advertise area’s nickname range within area • But, this would be incompatible • So…have R1 claim ownership of all nicknames not allowed in the area • Also, have R1 advertise, in layer 2, the reachable nicknames in its area

More Related