Hi,
I am pasting the feedback which I got it from one of the author for the same
query --
My Question --
Check the formula for the composite metric - If k5 is 0, then
the metric becomes 0 as per your formula.
Instead of ....* k5...., should it be ....+ k5.... ?
Feed back ---
Nope--it should be multiplied. EIGRP doesn't follow your normal
everyday rules of algebra! :-) If k5 is 0, then this term of the
formula (the multiply by k5) is ignored. It should probably be
written:
.... * max(k5, 1)
or something like that.
:-)
Russ
Regards / Thangavel
HCL Technologies Ltd.
Chennai --INDIA.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chuck Larrieu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 10:19 AM
Subject: RE: CertificationZone White Paper EIGRP ?
> Formulae?
>
> You been going to night school again? :->
>
> Chuck
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 2:04 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: CertificationZone White Paper EIGRP ?
>
> Phil,
> Doyle (Routing TCP/IP, volume 1) has a slightly more useful explanation.
> In the IGRP chapter (he doesn't dicuss EIGRP metrics much as he just
refers
> back to the IGRP formula which is the same), he explains "If k5 is set to
> 0, the [k5/(reliability + k4)] term is not used". It implies that there
> are essentially two different formulae:
> [k1*BW + (k2 * BW)/(256-load) + k3 * delay] * [k5/(reliability + k4)] if
k5
> <> 0, and
> [k1*BW + (k2 * BW)/(256-load) + k3 * delay] if k5 = 0.
>
> I agree with you on the maths :-)
>
> JMcL
> ---------------------- Forwarded by Jenny Mcleod/NSO/CSDA on 16/01/2001
> 08:52 am ---------------------------
>
>
> Phil Barker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>@groupstudy.com on 16/01/2001
> 04:46:09 am
>
> Please respond to Phil Barker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> cisco GroupStudy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> cc:
>
>
> Subject: RE: CertificationZone White Paper EIGRP ?
>
>
> Thanks for that link Glen,
>
> It looks now like its me against the world.
>
> In the UK I would call K5 the nominator of this part
> of the equation and "reliability + k4" would be the
> denominator.
>
> If the nominator = 0 then the expression k5/(rel + k4)
> will be 0. As a result when multiplying by anything on
> the left will result in 0.
>
> I'm wondering if there is a difference in algebraic
> notation batween USA and UK or if I need to go back to
> school ?
>
> Regards,
>
> Phil.
>
> --- Glenn Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >
> http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/103/eigrp1.html
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> > Phil Barker
> > Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 11:59 AM
> > To: cisco GroupStudy
> > Subject: CertificationZone White Paper EIGRP ?
> >
> >
> >
> > I'm having trouble with the equation referenced on
> > page 5 (A4) concerning the metric calculation.
> > Ref Don Dettmore.
> >
> > If this equation is correct as it stands and
> > K2=K4=K5=0
> > Then the Right Side of the equation will be 0, which
> > when multiplied by whatever on the left side will
> > equal 0. i.e metric = 0. I'm guessing a little that
> > these two sides should be added together not
> > multiplied ? Can anyone verify this ?
> >
> > I've cross checked this with Ivan Pepelnjak' book on
> > EIGRP. Chapter 1, Page 10 "Computing a Composite
> > Metric" appears to verify that the White Paper is
> > CORRECT. They both suggest that if K5 = 0 then the
> > Composite Metric = 0 ???
> >
> > Ivan also suggests that if all K-Values are set to
> > zero then the composite metric is always 1 ?
> >
> > Wether or not you add or multiply both sides
> > together
> > the composite metric will = 0.
> >
> > Anyway, there is also a typo below 108 should read
> > 10^8
> >
> >
> >
> > >>SNIP
> > This differs from the bandwidth usage in OSPF, in
> > which route cost, by default, derives from the sum
> > of
> > interface costs along the path. OSPF interface cost
> > defaults to 108/interfaceBandwidth, where
> > interfaceBandwidth is 1544 or the value of the
> > interface bandwidth commands (with a value in
> > kilobits).
> >
> >
> > >>END SNIP
> >
> >
> > Any thoughts ?
> >
> > Phil.
> >
> >
> >
> ____________________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at
> > http://mail.yahoo.co.uk
> > or your free @yahoo.ie address at
> > http://mail.yahoo.ie
> >
> > _________________________________
> > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk
> or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie
>
> _________________________________
> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> _________________________________
> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> _________________________________
> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
_________________________________
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
