Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sunybcs!sbcs!stealth!brnstnd
From: brnstnd@stealth.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: Traffic Sensitive SPF Routing is NOT too hard!
Message-ID: <4118@sbcs.sunysb.edu>
Date: 2 Dec 89 22:49:45 GMT
References: <8911302038.AA19457@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> <6203@cbnewsh.ATT.COM>
Sender: news@sbcs.sunysb.edu
Reply-To: brnstnd@stealth.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein)
Distribution: usa
Organization: IR
Lines: 16

In article <6203@cbnewsh.ATT.COM> tds@cbnewsh.ATT.COM (antonio.desimone) writes:
> An apparent difference
> is that routing in datagram networks can (in principle) react to
> congestion on the timescales on which queues build up.

Since when? I don't know of any methods of controlling flapping and
instability in principle. When the Internet is highly loaded it shows
that dynamic routing fails in practice as well.

There's absolutely no reason not to use a Bayesian or maximum-entropy
calculation of the minimal-cost distribution of paths for a given
distribution of load. Maximum-entropy routing yields the efficiency of
dynamic routing without the instability of dynamic routing. If you're
paranoid, recalculate paths every week instead of every month.

---Dan


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com