-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Clarify origination v.s. propagation interval #45
Comments
In my opinion, the distinction between origination interval and propagation interval is not necessary for the draft. The term "propagation interval" might not be entirely apropos for beacon origination, but the concepts are identical. I'd suggest to use "propagation interval" exclusively in the draft, or alternatively replace it with a more generic term (e.g. "announcement interval" or "PCB creation interval"). For what it's worth, I think the distinction of origination and propagation interval is not even useful in the implementation. If anything, we'd want to separately configure a frequency for core and non-core beaconing, but the configuration does allow to make this distinction.
Quoting the current text from that section:
My reading was that it means that the control plane can just resume with path discovery once the broken links have been recovered. That doesn't mean that it won't take some time to actually build the paths from that point on, just that nothing special needs to be done. |
I agree with @matzf that there is no editing action needed on the draft because of this issue |
We currently only mention propagation interval in the draft. However, there is a separate origination interval in the implementation.
As reported by @tzaeschke in #42 (comment) :
Does this distinction make sense? We might distinguish between interval for core beaconing and intra-ISD beaconing
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: