Peter, >> Link delay was dynamic before this draft. As William mentioned, TWAMP can >> already be used to provide a dynamic measurement of link delay. That, >> coupled with the link delay metric already gave us dynamic path computation >> requirements and the possibilities of oscillation and instability. We have >> chosen to charge ahead, without addressing those concerns already. > > TWAMP provided Min Unidirectional Link Delay is a dynamic one. On the other > side this value is calculated based on multiple measurements over period of > time and an average is used. Also, smart implementations can normalize the > value so that a small fluctuation of the delay is not causing the traffic to > shift or cause ECMP loss. > > What is important here is that the Min Unidirectional Link Delay is a link > characteristic, not something that is affected by the amount of traffic on > the link or subject to queuing delay. Same applies to Maximum link bandwidth.
I do understand that the minimum link delay is not meant to include queuing delay. That, however, does NOT make it a constant. There are several link types in use that exhibit variable delay: satellite links (e.g., Starlink), microwave links, and ancient link layers that deliver reliability through retransmission. Any of these (and probably a lot more) can create a noticeable and measurable difference in TWAMP. That would be reflected in an FA metric change. If you imagine a situation with multiiple parallel paths with nearly identical delays, you can easily imagine an oscillatory scenario. IMHO, this is an outstanding concern with FA. Please note that I’m NOT recommending that we back away. Rather, we should seek to solve the long-standing issue of oscillatory routing. Regards, Tony
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
