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

Re: Why MSDP?

To: Bill Fenner <fenner@research.att.com>
Subject: Re: Why MSDP?
From: Vijay Gill <vijay@umbc.edu>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 19:41:35 -0500
cc: <nagesh.chintada@alcatel.com>, <ssm-interest@external.cisco.com>, <pim@catarina.usc.edu>, <msdp@network-services.uoregon.edu>
In-Reply-To: <200103222325.RAA13581@windsor.research.att.com>

On Thu, 22 Mar 2001, Bill Fenner wrote:

>
> One reason: the timescales for change of active source indications are
> much different than BGP was designed to carry.  BGP wants to carry
> data that doesn't change very often, e.g. see route dampening.  Sources
> can come and go at an arbitrary rate, so the rate of change of the
> information is potentially much higher.

So churn wasn't ok for BGP, but its ok in MSDP? Just wondering.

/vijay

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Why MSDP?
  - From: John Meylor <jmeylor@cisco.com>

References:
- Re: Why MSDP?
  - From: Bill Fenner <fenner@research.att.com>

Prev by Date: Re: Auto-tunnel Rant
Next by Date: Re: Why MSDP?
Prev by thread: Re: Why MSDP?
Next by thread: Re: Why MSDP?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread