Subject: RE: Assert on outgoing interface

From: vishwas <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 98 11:17:00 PST

I think it is (N+1) if the assert winner were to send another asser.

Ref : Recent discussion saying ">The spec says it SHOULD send another   
assert."

Regards
Vishwanath S. Edavayyanamath
 --------------------------------------------------------------------------  
 ------------------------
Software Engineer, Future Software Pvt. Ltd, Chennai, India
Ph : +91-44-4330550 (335)
Private e-mail : [email-masked]

 -----Original Message-----
From: Bill Fenner [SMTP:[email-masked]]
Sent: Monday, November 16, 1998 9:41 PM
To: Liming Wei
Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked];   
[email-masked]
Subject: Re: Assert on outgoing interface

Sorry for sending multiple messages in response to one.  I just came
back from travel and haven't restarted my brain yet.

In message <[email-masked]>you write:
>One can choose not
>to do so if one think saving that one assert message is more
>important than the benefit of sending it.

Except it's N-1 assert messages; in a pathological case, with
100 routers on the LAN, the Assert winner could be sending 99
"I-won-the-Assert" messages.

  Bill

---

From: Ahmed A-G Helmy <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1998 01:18:32 -0800 (PST)

> Ref : Recent discussion saying ">The spec says it SHOULD send another   

hmm... why another Assert ?! I believe that a prune would do the trick, 
and it is no different than the usual behavior (see my prev email).

As for the pathological case, I agree, if the winner would send this 
prune immediately, there may be N+1 prunes,... however, what actually 
happens is that the winner would schedule the prune of the interface 
(perhaps 3 to 5 sec.s.. forgot what we say in the spec re. the value), 
and shortly before the timer fires, say in the 3rd sec of the 5 secs, the 
prune (or prune-alert if u will) would be sent. 
	This would make it practically very highly unlikely to run into 
the pathological case, or even close to it, IMHO. !

or have I missed something ?!

Regs,
-A