Re: [Ospf-manet] Simulation results for MPR adjacency reduction
Emmanuel Baccelli <Emmanuel.Baccelli@inria.fr> Mon, 08 January 2007 14:07 UTC
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H3v9d-0000Fz-KY; Mon, 08 Jan 2007 09:07:13 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H3v9b-0000Fs-Ty for ospf-manet@ietf.org; Mon, 08 Jan 2007 09:07:11 -0500
Received: from discorde.inria.fr ([192.93.2.38]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H3v9a-0003Dp-GA for ospf-manet@ietf.org; Mon, 08 Jan 2007 09:07:11 -0500
Received: from [192.168.112.199] (sphinx.lix.polytechnique.fr [129.104.11.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by discorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l08E74wf008055 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <ospf-manet@ietf.org>; Mon, 8 Jan 2007 15:07:05 +0100
Message-ID: <45A25007.8030100@inria.fr>
Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 15:07:03 +0100
From: Emmanuel Baccelli <Emmanuel.Baccelli@inria.fr>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (Macintosh/20061207)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ospf-manet@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Ospf-manet] Simulation results for MPR adjacency reduction
References: <459AC6CE.5060009@earthlink.net>
In-Reply-To: <459AC6CE.5060009@earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Miltered: at discorde with ID 45A25009.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)!
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: cab78e1e39c4b328567edb48482b6a69
X-BeenThere: ospf-manet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions of OSPFv3 extensions supporting MANET <ospf-manet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf-manet>, <mailto:ospf-manet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ospf-manet>
List-Post: <mailto:ospf-manet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ospf-manet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf-manet>, <mailto:ospf-manet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ospf-manet-bounces@ietf.org
Dear Richard, all, Happy new year to you and yours. Thanks for your contribution to the MPR-OSPF code. We already knew that the MPR-OSPF draft is simple to understand and to implement, but you were really very fast. Congratulations. However, we did not find exactly the same results as the ones you mentionned, we will release soon the results we got. In particular our simulation results show that MPR-based topology reduction and multicast outperforms MDR and OR performance reported by Boeing at the IETF. Here is an update to the MPR-OSPF code that implements multicast transmissions http://ndquan.free.fr/GTNetS/gtnets-LSAreduc-Mcast.tar.bz2 The use of multicast is now implemented in addition to MPR topology reduction, which provides a simple and robust solution ensuring that while the overhead is drastically reduced, every advertized link is still symmetric and synchronized. The available code for MPR-OSPF actually outperforms both OR and MDR (full LSA) simulated with the same parameters, based on the reports of Boeing that were presented at the IETF. We will release a report about these results soon. This confirms that topology reduction on its own is very efficient, apparently more than adjacency reduction. We would nevertheless like to stress the fact that the simulation scenarios and parameters that are used in the Boeing reports are quite restrictive. In particular, we think the values of parameters such as Retransmit time and min LSA interval are not in tune at all with high mobility, and that the 2x2 scenario with almost mesh connectivity is too specific. We think that it is essential to simulate other scenarios and other parameters. Concerning bugs in the code, we also found some of them that we want to share with you: for instance, it seems that an old Ack can somehow replace a newer Ack in the database and therefore create problems regarding retransmissions. Did you notice such a behaviour? We had to fix this. We have moreover fixed the bug you have mentionned concerning the conflicting flags OSPF6_MANET_MDR_FLOOD and OSPF6_MANET_MPR_TOPO_REDUC that can now be compiled together. Regards, Emmanuel _______________________________________________ Ospf-manet mailing list Ospf-manet@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf-manet
- [Ospf-manet] Simulation results for MPR adjacency… Richard Ogier
- Re: [Ospf-manet] Simulation results for MPR adjac… Emmanuel Baccelli
- Re: [Ospf-manet] Simulation results for MPR adjac… Richard Ogier