[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: still having problems with DV routing



On Fri, 5 Nov 1999, Alton Yu wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Try set the preference_ value for Agent/rtproto/DV to be lower than the one
> of Direct.
> 
> Alton.

I don't think that's the solution to this problem, preference is used for
differentiating between routing protocols (and the paths they returned). 
In other words, what if I only want to use DV routing (i.e., no Direct
routing agent is attached to the node)? I think there must be something
wrong with the DV code. As I mentioned in my last mail, once DV routing
agent is used at some nodes, those node will not be able to send
traffic! This  will not happen if you are using old version NS, or if you
use static routing method. I'm trying to figure that out. But thanks
anyway.

> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From:	Guo, Liang [SMTP:[email protected]]
> > Sent:	Thursday, November 04, 1999 5:42 PM
> > To:	[email protected]
> > Subject:	still having problems with DV routing
> > 
> > 
> > Hi, 
> > 
> > I think there're still bugs inside DV routing codes (except the "addr_" ->
> > "agent_addr_"). Because I'm runing the example code "simple-rtg.tcl" under
> > directory tcl/ex, and it turns out that if I set the routing protocol to
> > be DV, then the traffic generator will stop sending packet. It doesn't
> > happen if I choose session routing or static routing. 
> > 
> > Another question is, will link cost affect the DV routing process? In the
> > same example, I set the cost of the direct path (0-1) to be much higher
> > than the alternate path (0-2-1), but the router still choose the direct
> > path, again, static routing seems to be smarter in this case.
> > 
> > Thanks in advance.
> > 
> > Guo, Liang.
> > 
> 

Guo, Liang 

[email protected]                     Dept. of Comp. Sci., Boston Univ.,
(617)353-8924 (O)                  111 Cummington St., MCS-217,
(617)859-8879 (H)                  Boston, MA 02215