Subject: Re: WG Item?: draft-zinin-microloop-analysis-01.txt

From: Alia Atlas <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 15:48:44 -0400

Mike,

At 10:20 AM 6/16/2005, mike shand wrote:
On the complexity front, I think we can probably omit the type B
destinations (treating them as type Cs). This will give slightly worse
performance (but my simulations indicate this is quite a small
change), but will allow the convergence to be complete after 1 rather
than 2 delay cycles, and will avoid the need to change a FIB entry for
a destination twice. This is probably a tradeoff worth making (since
neither gives complete protection).

Where would you insert stopping using the LFA into a scheme without
the type B?  I agree that type B didn't appear frequently - but it's
also not clear to me that there is a large complexity associated with
implementing it.

Alia

_______________________________________________
Rtgwg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg

---

From: Stewart Bryant <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 11:42:22 +0100

Alia

I don't quite understand your question.

All that is being proposed (and was simulated) is that type B
destinations are treated as type C destinations. Everything
else works exactly the same.

- Stewart