Subject: RE: [bmwg] On the proposed OSPF BMWG item.

From: "Manral, Vishwas" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 03:04:50 -0500

Kevin/list,

My responses:-

>2) Is the current EGP work mature enough so that the IGP work
>   will be complementary?  Should we hold off the IGP work so that
>   we can build in "lessons learned" from the EGP work? 
There has been a lot of work already on OSPF convergence, including
"Experience in Black-Box OSPF measurement" - by Albert Greenberg/Aman Shaikh
as Randy pointed out. We are also in constant touch with the Howard(EGP
folks for feedback, which we have readily got) on our draft, there has been
a demand for this draft and I see no reason why we cannot go ahead with the
work now in the group.

>3) The I-Ds related to this workplan connote "white box" 
>   mechanisms to characterize the device under test.
>   (E.g., SPF Computation Time)  The BMWG has traditionally 
>   restricted its purview to black-box (device external) heuristics.  
>   Is this a can of worms we wish to open?  
Although we have used show command for "SPF time measurement", which is
probably present in most existing routers, we have given a black box
alternative method for the same. However because SPF times can have
granularity of microseconds, it may not be easy to correctly measure SPF
times.

However I do agree, we have opened the lid for something new on BMWG, and
whether that is appropriate(can of worms ??) is debatable on the list.

-Vishwas

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

---

From: Randy Bush <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 12:24:40 +0100

> "Experience in Black-Box OSPF measurement" - by Albert Greenberg/Aman
> Shaikh as Randy pointed out.

did you notice that 'convergence' was only used in the multi-router sense,
though the measurement was of a single box?

randy

---

From: Randy Bush <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 12:24:40 +0100

randy