From: Guo, M. <mi...@in...> - 2004-01-08 05:05:43
|
Welcome back, we will investigate it. =20 Thanks Guo Min -----Original Message----- From: tip...@li... = [mailto:tip...@li...]On Behalf Of Jon = Maloy Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 6:42 AM To: Guo, Min Cc: tipc Subject: [Tipc-discussion] Re: how about the current tipc work Hi Guo, I am finally back from my Christmas/New year brak, and can read my Ericsson mail again. One reason for having this neighbour protocol is, just as you said, to be able to sub-divide bigg clusters into smaller ones on the same = LAN. The calulations I do about link supervision background load in my draft explains why, but even memory usage considerations may require such split of clusters. Another reason is that we may want to have several clusters or zones to = communicate even when they are not on the same LAN, and maybe even=20 geographically separated. This is actually something we do in our own Ericsson products. Instead of having to set up and maintain hundreds or even thousands of = such=20 links manually when the clusters are changing, it is desirable with a = protocol=20 that can do this automatically and with an optimal result. This is the = purpose with the protocol. Actually, it is implemented, and *was* working, in Manager.c in the = ericsson_stable version. But the functionality I describe in the draft is more advanced, = with "all-to-N" links instead of "all-to-2" links as in the older version, and = supporting multicast setup, intead of relying on a manually configured pilot link. /jon Guo, Min wrote: PS: Is there anyone there who would be interested to work with the inter-cluster neighbour detection protocol ? The code is found in cfg.c, but it probably does not work any more. Anyway I updated the protocol a little in my draft, as you may see, so the code must follow. This is an interesting task, and a cool algorithm to demonstrate to the world. =20 Why use such complex neighbor detection protocol?=20 In my mind, I think it can be used to divide large cluster into small = cluster in the same LAN, and it can also do better load balance? Is that right? Thanks Guo Min =20 |