Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Review of draft-ietf-trill-pseudonode-nickname-05

[Donald Eastlake <[e-mail]>]

Hi Jari,

On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 9:22 AM, Jari Arkko <[e-mail]> wrote:
> Thanks for the in-depth review, Russ! Very much appreciated.
>
> I believe we still has to resolve what to do about the sort order.
>
> (Maybe this helps: I’m not actually sure why in a k-element set you order them based <something> mod k because that would seem to produce likely duplicates. Since your backup option in the case of duplicates is proper numeric sort, why just not do that and only that? E.g. "RBridges are sorted in byte string ascending order by their LAALP IDs, or if they are equal, by their System IDs considered as unsigned integers.” But it could also be that it is too early and I have not yet had enough Diet Coke…)

I believe the idea is to quasi-randomize the order. The DF election is
per VLAN and a goal is to spread the multicast traffic across the
RBridges in the active-active edge group.

> Also, I am not sure I understand this in Section 5.2:
>
>    Assuming there are … k member RBridges in an RBv; ... each RBridge is
>    referred to as RBj where 0 <= j < k-1
>
> Wouldn’t that mean that for 2 bridges you have RB0 only, because j=1 does not satisfy 0 <= j < k-1 because 0 <= 1 < 1 is untrue. But again, it is too early here and maybe I’m missing something.

It is interesting that no one else noticed this. I agree it should
either be "... j <= k=1" or "... j < k".

Thanks,
Donald
=============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   [phone] (cell)
 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
 [e-mail]

> Jari
>