[Csci551-talk] Question on Load Sensitive Routing Example

[John Heidemann]

On Sat, 01 May 2004 21:42:59 PDT, "min" wrote: 
>according to our new handout, I think only router 3 and router 1 need up
>their MED value. Since router 5 originates the packet, router 3 forwards the
>packet, and router 1 recvs the packet.
>
>according to handout, routers forward and receive should update MED
>
>Am I right?

Yes, you're right that routers that originate the packet are not
considered to have forwarded the packet for MED purposes.

(My simple yes below needs qualification.)

   -John Heidemann

>
>Cheers
>Min
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "John Heidemann" <johnh at ISI.EDU>
>To: "Aaron Tu" <atu011 at earthlink.net>
>Cc: <csci551-talk at mailman.isi.edu>
>Sent: 2004?5?1? 17:30
>Subject: Re: [Csci551-talk] Question on Load Sensitive Routing Example
>
>
>> On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 22:58:48 PDT, "Aaron Tu" wrote:
>> >For the updated example given in section 4:
>> >
>> >S 5 15.0.0.1 11.0.0.1
>> >S 5 15.0.0.1 11.0.0.1
>> >S 5 15.0.0.1 11.0.0.1
>> ># after three packets, router 1 should up its MED value
>> ># and propagate this to other nodes
>> >
>> >Since router 3 and 5 forward the packet, should they up their MED values
>> >as well?
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>> >Should we wait until the packet reaches its destination before
>> >propagating LSA message?
>> >Or should we start immediately?
>> >In this case,
>> >should router 5 initiate the LSA message while the packet is still
>> >trying to reach its destination? I think it would be much easier to what
>> >until the packet reaches its destination before propagating LSA message.
>>
>> The assignment does not specify that level of timing detail.  For
>> things that are not specified you can chose.
>>
>> (Although I'm not sure why it would be easier to wait... adding
>> synchronization generally takes extra effort.)
>>
>>    -John Heidemann
>>