On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 04:47:52PM +0100, Paul Jakma wrote: > On Fri, 26 Jun 2015, Paul Jakma wrote: > > >We have the same default RxmtInterval. I wonder, is that value perhaps too > >high, in this day and age?
Well, probably because it is a suggested value in RFC 2328. Seems to me like changing this default value to 1 s is perhaps reasonable enough today. > Oh, and default time-out values always suck. > > Could perhaps measure RTT, e.g. from the DD packets, and from > LS-Re<->LS-Update and use that? Seems hacky though, only being able to do it > on a packet-specific basis. Could maybe extend OSPF (new packet type, or an > extension to Hello packets - harder to be back-compat on that though) to > measure this. Not sure if it's worth the effort though.. DD exchange on the beginning could provide a good estimate, but as it is not adaptive to later changes and on some links it might change wildly (e.g. wireless on some cards), seems to me that it is not worth the effort. -- Elen sila lumenn' omentielvo Ondrej 'Santiago' Zajicek (email: [email protected]) OpenPGP encrypted e-mails preferred (KeyID 0x11DEADC3, wwwkeys.pgp.net) "To err is human -- to blame it on a computer is even more so."
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Quagga-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-dev
