RE: Advertisement Interval Vs Timeout

I took Mukesh's advice and looked over the IPv6 -08 spec.
It's really good! I claim that the draft describes exactly
the timer behavior we want (both in IPv4 and IPv6) except
for one flaw: it says the master should send an advertisement
once every Advertisement_Interval instead of allowing the
master to send advertisements at any rate it wants but no
*slower* than once every Advertisement_Interval.

If the master were allowed to send at faster rates,
more than three advertisements could be sent per timeout
interval, which is what people experimenting with
faster timeouts tell us they found was necessary for
stability in that environment.

Now, of course, it's a little strange if the
Advertisement_Interval isn't the interval the master
advertises at. Perhaps we should just rename it
Minimum_Advertisement_Interval and call it a day?
(In a perfect world, I'd want to just rewrite the
entire protocol and spec to base everything on the
timeout and calculate the minimum advertisement interval
from that, but that seems like a lot of work for no gain.)

I recommend this change for the IPv6 spec, at least.

But if the VRRPv3 spec is what we want for fast timers,
shouldn't we work towards making v3 go both ways? Or making
a v3 for IPv4? Or should we just continue on the original
path of adding this new time behavior as an option in the
v2 IPv4 spec? I think I already mentioned that I didn't
pay attention to why the VRRPv3 spec was made IPv6 specific,
so I don't know how we got where we are, but it seems a
shame to have two specs if we don't need them.

-don

_______________________________________________
vrrp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vrrp