Subject: [bmwg] LDP convergence

From: "Vishwas Manral" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 10:36:28 -0800

Hi Rajiv/ Karthik,

I would like to encourage the work being done on LDP convergence.

We are also currently working on LDP scalability as well as
convergence improvements. I find that we need to take scalability and
convergence at hand togather. Having millisecond Hellos may help
faster convergence, but may reduce scalability, as the adjacencies
will go down, because of the short hold period.

As most measurements are done for comparative testing besides just
seeing the performance of a device. In a test report we need to report
all parameters like memory/ CPU speed. We also need to report all
parameters like Hello Interval, Hold Time, Keepalive time etc. Other
protocols running, number of routes etc need to be reported too.

We also need to talk about Label Retention modes etc, which affect
convergence. We need to detail all that in the draft too I think.

Also the convergence times, when the LDP goes down and then comes up
afresh (note though this happens very less often - it has been a major
problem in networks, bringing down ISP networks for days togather)
needs to be done too.

The exact measurements and time delays are not clear either, like when
to start measuring and what periods to measure.

I would think we may need a revision of the draft before we go in
further in the IETF process.

Thanks,
Vishwas
_______________________________________________
bmwg mailing list
[email-masked]
http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg

---

From: "Vishwas Manral" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 15:11:56 -0800

Hi Jay/ Rajiv,

Another thing that would be required would be Inter-Area versus
Intra-Area. I think the document needs to define more methodology and
what needs to be done in each of the cases.

Thanks,
Vishwas