Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!uunet!bu.edu!bu-it.bu.edu!kwe
From: kwe@bu-it.bu.edu (Kent England)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.sys.cisco
Subject: Re: delay of an interface
Message-ID: <77841@bu.edu.bu.edu>
Date: 27 Mar 91 20:52:33 GMT
Article-I.D.: bu.77841
References: <33638@boulder.Colorado.EDU>
Sender: news@bu.edu.bu.edu
Reply-To: kwe@bu.edu
Organization: Boston University Information Technology
Lines: 22

> From: whp4@cisco.com (Bill Palmer)
> 
> It should be K1 == K3 == 1, K2 == K4 == K5 == 0
> 
> By default, your metric won't change if your topology doesn't.  Only
> the truly brave who like solving non-linear feedback systems will want
> to play with K2, K4 and K5, I think.
> 

	Does cisco itself fall into the truly brave category?  I
remember not so long ago when cisco touted IGRP for its vector metric.
At that time there was no mention of the fact that most of those
values were zero and always have been.

	(Those truly interested in IGRP should read Chuck Hedrick's
description of IGRP from a couple of years ago.  I packed all my RFCs
for a move next week or I would be able to offer a place to find this
document.  Perhaps someone else could say?  Might be at rutgers in
anon FTP...  At any rate, a good description of the protocol and an
explanation of how the metric equations allegedly work.)

	--Kent