So you have described the difference with OFIB (RFC 6976), but how does
your proposal differ from "incremental cost advertisement" as described
in RFC 5715 section 6.1?
Mike
On 22/10/2013 04:39, Yangang wrote:
OK, I got it.
Actually, we pay attention to two point:
1. Which method will be more nicety? In RFC6976, all devices in network need
calculate the schedule time, base on the different hardware and environment, we
worry about its effect. In our draft, only failure point adjust the cost, the
other device just response the cost change. I think the effect of this kind of
difference will be less.
2. Due to no new extension, maybe the distribution will be more smoothly.
-----邮件原件-----
发件人: Acee Lindem [mailto:[email protected]]
发送时间: 2013年10月22日 9:42
收件人: Yangang
抄送: [email protected]; Zhangxudong (zhangxudong, VRP)
主题: Re: 答复: Soliciting WG feedback and comments on
draft-zxd-rtgwg-ordered-metric-adjustment-00
I'm aware of the basic premise of the two drafts and was not asking for you to
restate the obvious. Specifically, what are the benefits and determents of your
draft when compared to RFC 6976?
Acee
On Oct 21, 2013, at 9:30 PM, Yangang wrote:
Our draft is similar with section 6.1 in RFC5715, the cost of changed link will
be adjusted and advertised, maybe more than one time, this sequence will base
on some pre-calculations. But in RFC 6976, each device should calculate the
distance with the failue link, base on this distance, each device decide when
the FIB will be updated.
-----邮件原件-----
发件人: Acee Lindem [mailto:[email protected]]
发送时间: 2013年10月21日 10:07
收件人: Yangang
抄送: [email protected]; Zhangxudong (zhangxudong, VRP)
主题: Re: Soliciting WG feedback and comments on
draft-zxd-rtgwg-ordered-metric-adjustment-00
Can you contrast this with RFC 6976? You include RFC 6976 in the Normative
References but it is never referenced (this will show up if you run idnits).
Acee
On Oct 20, 2013, at 9:49 PM, Yangang wrote:
Hi:
We had submitted the a new draft:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zxd-rtgwg-ordered-metric-adjustment-00, we
want to discuss the micro-loop problem through another method. Your feedback
and comments on the rtgwg mailing list are appreciated.
Thanks,
Rahul.Yan
-----邮件原件-----
发件人: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
发送时间: 2013年10月18日 15:47
收件人: Zhangxudong (zhangxudong, VRP); Yangang
主题: New Version Notification for
draft-zxd-rtgwg-ordered-metric-adjustment-00.txt
A new version of I-D, draft-zxd-rtgwg-ordered-metric-adjustment-00.txt
has been successfully submitted by Xudong Zhang and posted to the
IETF repository.
Filename: draft-zxd-rtgwg-ordered-metric-adjustment
Revision: 00
Title: Algorithm for Ordered Metric Adjustment
Creation date: 2013-10-18
Group: Individual Submission
Number of pages: 10
URL:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-zxd-rtgwg-ordered-metric-adjustment-00.txt
Status:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zxd-rtgwg-ordered-metric-adjustment
Htmlized:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zxd-rtgwg-ordered-metric-adjustment-00
Abstract:
Upon link down event or link up event, each device in network
individually schedules route calculation. Because of different
hardware capabilities and internal/external environments, the time to
update forwarding entries on these devices are disordered which can
cause a transient forwarding loop. This document introduces a method
to prevent forwarding loop by adjusting link metric gradually for
several times.
Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
The IETF Secretariat
_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
