Re: [Ospf-wireless-design] Re: consensus
Richard Ogier <rich.ogier@earthlink.net> Fri, 04 November 2005 18:46 UTC
Received: from localhost.cnri.reston.va.us ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EY6aP-0006ei-E7; Fri, 04 Nov 2005 13:46:49 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EY6aO-0006ed-62 for ospf-wireless-design@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 04 Nov 2005 13:46:48 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA06902 for <ospf-wireless-design@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Nov 2005 13:46:25 -0500 (EST)
Received: from pop-canoe.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([207.69.195.66]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EY6pQ-0007EC-DK for ospf-wireless-design@ietf.org; Fri, 04 Nov 2005 14:02:21 -0500
Received: from dialup-4.246.15.16.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net ([4.246.15.16] helo=earthlink.net) by pop-canoe.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #10) id 1EY6aE-0000oe-00; Fri, 04 Nov 2005 13:46:39 -0500
Message-ID: <436BAC8E.5010607@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2005 10:46:38 -0800
From: Richard Ogier <rich.ogier@earthlink.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011128 Netscape6/6.2.1 (emach0202)
X-Accept-Language: en-us
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Emmanuel Baccelli <Emmanuel.Baccelli@inria.fr>
Subject: Re: [Ospf-wireless-design] Re: consensus
References: <436B37D9.3070709@inria.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: 2.9 (++)
X-Scan-Signature: 7d33c50f3756db14428398e2bdedd581
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: ospf-wireless-design@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ospf-wireless-design@lists.ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: OSPF Wireless Design Team <ospf-wireless-design.lists.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf-wireless-design>, <mailto:ospf-wireless-design-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/private/ospf-wireless-design>
List-Post: <mailto:ospf-wireless-design@lists.ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ospf-wireless-design-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf-wireless-design>, <mailto:ospf-wireless-design-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ospf-wireless-design-bounces@lists.ietf.org
Errors-To: ospf-wireless-design-bounces@lists.ietf.org
> We were therefore very surprised to compare these with the simulation > results given by > Richard, as there is a rather drastic difference? Another important reason for the difference, for the last set of simulation results that I presented, is that I was using *persistent* adjacencies, so that once an adjacency is formed, it is never torn down as long as a bidirectional link exists. This was done to reduce the *rate* of new adjacencies, which is more important than the average number of adjacencies. (Even with this modification, the rate of new adjacencies was much larger for MPRs than for OSPF-MDR.) I am just repeating what I explained in my emails presenting simulation results, so please refer to those emails for more details. Richard _______________________________________________ Ospf-wireless-design mailing list Ospf-wireless-design@lists.ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf-wireless-design
- [Ospf-wireless-design] Re: consensus Emmanuel Baccelli
- RE: [Ospf-wireless-design] Re: consensus Spagnolo, Phillip A
- RE: [Ospf-wireless-design] Re: consensus Joe Macker
- Re: [Ospf-wireless-design] Re: consensus Richard Ogier
- Re: [Ospf-wireless-design] Re: consensus Richard Ogier
- Re: [Ospf-wireless-design] Re: consensus Acee Lindem
- Re: [Ospf-wireless-design] Re: consensus Richard Ogier
- RE: [Ospf-wireless-design] Re: consensus Henderson, Thomas R