The draft doesn't currently specify how hosts should age the information they collect about prefixes active on a link. Today JinHyeock suggested three times the maximum value of MaxRtrAdvInterval (3 * 1800 sec = 1.5hr) as an expiry time for unrefreshed data. I said that when an Advertisement Interval option is present in the RA, a multiple of that could be used. Any support for 1.5hrs? Any support for allowing 3 times the Advertisement Interval, if present, as an optimization?
This sounds fine. It's just a default, after all.
jak
I don't think the number should be coupled to the advertisement interval, since that number says how often RAs are sent, and not how quickly the a flush renumbering followed by reassignment to a different link might happen. So picking some reasonable fixed constant for this is fine. 1.5 hours is within my range of comfort. Erik
I think this one's resolved: Brett Pentland wrote: > The draft doesn't currently specify how hosts should age the > information they collect about prefixes active on a link. > > Today JinHyeock suggested three times the maximum value of > MaxRtrAdvInterval (3 * 1800 sec = 1.5hr) as an expiry time for > unrefreshed data. I said that when an Advertisement Interval > option is present in the RA, a multiple of that could be used. > > Any support for 1.5hrs? Any support for allowing 3 times the > Advertisement Interval, if present, as an optimization? Yes for 1.5 hours. No for using the advertisement interval.
| Topic DNASoln1Issue007 . { Edit | Attach | Ref-By | Printable | Diffs | r1.3 | > | r1.2 | > | r1.1 | More } |
|
Revision r1.3 - 22 Apr 2005 - 02:27 GMT - Main.BrettPentland Parents: WebHome > DNASolution1 |
Copyright © 1999-2003 by the contributing authors.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors. Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWiki? Send feedback. |