Subject: Re: [Ospf-wireless-design] any consensus?

From: Richard Ogier <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2005 07:54:43 -0800

One correction to the message I sent yesterday.
The GTNetS code for OSPF-MDR actually keeps an existing
adjacency as long as either endpoint is an MDR *or*
Backup MDR (even if uniconnected adjacencies are used).
This is what the draft currently specifies (but could
be changed depending on which way performs better).

I reran my simulations using the above rule, and the average number
of adjacencies increased to 62.58 for 50 nodes, very close to what
Phil obtained with the GTNetS simulations (63.47).
Here are the results using the above rule:

New results (adjacency is torn down in OSPF-MDR when neither
endpoint is an MDR or Backup MDR):

#nodes   Method     Average # adj.    Average rate of new adj.
----------------------------------------------------------------
50        MDRs          62.6                   2.61 (adj per sec)
50        MPRs         463.4                  19.00
----------------------------------------------------------------
100       MDRs         120.1                   4.59
100       MPRs        1440.2                  64.02
----------------------------------------------------------------

Previous results (adjacency is torn down in OSPF-MDR when neither
endpoint is an MDR):

#nodes   Method     Average # adj.    Average rate of new adj.
----------------------------------------------------------------
50        MDRs          54.8                   2.78 (adj per sec)
50        MPRs         463.4                  19.00
----------------------------------------------------------------
100       MDRs         110.1                   4.73
100       MPRs        1440.2                  64.02
----------------------------------------------------------------

Richard

_______________________________________________
Ospf-wireless-design mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf-wireless-design