Hi all,
I concur with Stewart.
>From my POV, it would be nice if the tables in Section 8 of
>draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa were aligned with those in Section 9
>of RFC 7490,
This would facilitate meaningful comparison between the two sets of networks.
One of the differences between RFC 7490 and what the TI-LFA draft calls "repair
with 1 SID" is that the former restricts computation of the PQ nodes to just
one per failed link ("the Q-space of E with respect to link S-E is used as a
proxy for the Q-space of each destination" the latter leaves it "be up to each
implementation to determine the good tradeoff between scaling and accuracy of
the optimization". It would be nice if the authors could indicate whether per
destination computation of PQ nodes has been used in the analysis each specific
network or not.
My 2c,
Sasha
Office: +972-39266302
Cell: +972-549266302
Email: [email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: rtgwg <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Stewart Bryant
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2019 7:00 PM
To: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa Table 1 questions
I would like to understand what Table 1 in
draft-ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa is telling us.
It uses the terms links and circuits without distinguishing between the two. I
could speculate that a circuit is a group of links, but then the ratio of nodes
to circuits in T1 seems far too low at less than 1:1 in network T1.
Then the node to link ratio sounds quite high with fan outs of 84:1 in T2.
Please could you explain what you mean by circuits and links in this table.
What I would like to know is the average ratio of nodes to neighbours, and the
number of parallel links per neighbour.
Best regards
Stewart
_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://clicktime.symantec.com/3NcFJb3zFzZsCG7Sv5AxXRB6H2?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Frtgwg
___________________________________________________________________________
This e-mail message is intended for the recipient only and contains information
which is
CONFIDENTIAL and which may be proprietary to ECI Telecom. If you have received
this
transmission in error, please inform us by e-mail, phone or fax, and then
delete the original
and all copies thereof.
___________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
