Subject: Re: [pim] Re: bi-dir features [I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-mboned-routingarch-00.txt]

From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 13:11:34 +0300 (EEST)

I still haven't managed to get text from anyone, and as I know very 
little about the convergence differences pim-sm vs bidir-pim, I can't 
make it up myself.

ANYONE?

This text in draft-ietf-mboned-routingarch-00.txt needs to be 
expanded/corrected:

2.5.3  Bi-directional PIM

    Bi-directional PIM (see Section 2.1.3) was designed with faster
    multicast convergence in mind, and if fast failover is required, it
    may seem like an attractive solution.

    XXX: someone want to send a bit more text about the convergence
    differences wrt PIM-SM?

On Tue, 10 May 2005, Pekka Savola wrote:
> I've been waiting for follow-ups but nothing yet, so asking explicitly:
>
> Could any bidir-pim expert take a look and provide (short) text ?
>
> On Sat, 30 Apr 2005, Dino Farinacci wrote:
>>>> Well, at least Toerless argued bi-dir PIM as ""establish and
>>>> fast-converge of loop-free rp-rooted bidirectional spanning trees
>>>> within a network", but maybe I misunderstood or this would not have
>>>> full consensus.
>> 
>>    I can guess he is coming from the point of view that since there is
>>    less total state, all state can converge faster than in ASM and/or SSM.
>>    I was referring to the time it takes for a single route to converge.
>>    But having said that, when many (*,G) entries point to the same RP and
>>    that RP converges, then all routes converge at the same time.
>> 
>>    That should be clarified in the text you provided.
>> 
>>>> But I don't care about this either way -- I just want to have 1-2
>>>> paragraph short summary about Bi-dir PIM compared to PIM-SM.  The two
>>>> subsections, as they currently are, are below.  I'm open to any
>>>> suggestions as how to reword them!
>> 
>>    Fine. But blanket statements can be misleading. A few more words like
>>    "total convergence" or "less state translate to better convergence" 
>> would
>>    be a good idea IMO.
>
> _______________________________________________
> pim mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim
>

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

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