> Working with Chris Hopps and Juliusz Chroboczek, Margaret just posted
> draft-mrw-homenet-rtg-comparison-01.txt.
This is on
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-mrw-homenet-rtg-comparison
As Mark mentioned, we didn't attempt to reach consensus with this
document -- we tried to produce something that's reasonably informative as
quickly as possible.
Here's my initial list of things that we might consider tweaking for -02:
1. The table in Section 13.3 compares the available implementation of
Source-Specific Babel with the available implementation of
Source-Specific IS-IS, which is written in Erlang and requires massive
resources. We should add a column with the sizes of Quagga's C version
of IS-IS -- while this version is incomplete and not source-specific,
this should give a rough idea of how much we can expect to be able to
scale down IS-IS.
(This is a little more work than you might expect, since it requires
isolating just the isisd, zebra and libzebra bits of Quagga. I hope
Steven volunteers ;-) )
2. We didn't discuss the fact that Babel runs over UDP, while IS-IS runs
directly over layer 2. This has a number of consequences, most notably
related to ease of implementation, portability, and the ability to run
over tunnels (say, GRE or OpenVPN in tun mode). I refer you to my
previous posting to this list:
http://mid.gmane.org/87iookwzgj.wl%25...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr
3. Section 3.3 makes some rather strong claims about IS-IS scalability.
Since we later argue in favour of a single-area implementation of
IS-IS, I feel that these claims require some justification. However,
since I'm not convinced that scalability beyond 200 nodes or so is an
important issue for Homenet, I won't try to push this particular point.
-- Juliusz
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
homenet@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
