Subject: Re: Re: Why MinRouteAdverInterval is recommended 30

From: "Qiu Jian" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2002 9:43:53 +0800

Hello,Jeffrey Haas

======= On 2002-11-01 10:29:00 you wrote: =======

>This is a matter of some debate.
>
That means the value of MinRouteAdver is totally empirical?

>
>Theoretically, this means that if a route is still reachable (feasible),
>then you will delay sending changes to the route.  This will
>cause the entire routing system (in this case, possibly the Internet)
>to have potential for blackholes and forwarding loops due to these
>timers for some period of time.  The following paper goes into 
>some details on this:
>
>http://www.acm.org/sigcomm/sigcomm2000/conf/paper/sigcomm2000-5-2.pdf
>
>-- 
The paper said:
Under a MinRouteAdver timer, a node must process all(n-1) announcements
from its neighbors before it can send a new update.

Does it mean the function of MinRouteAdver is to wait all the other update
about a prefix before sending it? and 30 seconds is considered long enough
to guarantee it.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
	Thanks.		

Best Regards,

　　　　　　　　Qiu Jian
　　　　　　　　[email-masked]
　　　　　　　　　　2002-11-02