WG ACTION: 2 weeks to discuss [LL62] Do not space probes randomly
Erik Guttman <[email protected]> Wed, 5 May 2004 01:11:53 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.zeroconf |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <a05200f11bcbdce72e6c1@[80.139.178.51]> |
Please post discussion of this issue to the mailing list over the next two weeks ending May 18, 2004. In order to accept this issued, we will need a strong WG consensus given that this is very late in the process. Please see http://www.drizzle.org/~aboba/ZEROCONF/issues.html for a list of current issues and their status. [LL62] Description of Issue: Do not space probes randomly Submitter Name: Stuart Cheshire Submitter Email Address: [email protected] Date first submitted: 04 May 04 Reference: LL31 Comment Type ['t'ech|'e'dit]: t Prio ['S' Must|1 should|2 may]: s Section: 2.2.1 Rationale/Explanation: Lengthy Description: [Stuart] > When ready to begin probing, the host should then wait for a random > time interval selected uniformly in the range PROBE_MIN to PROBE_MAX > seconds, and should then send NUM_PROBES probe packets, spaced > randomly, PROBE_MIN to PROBE_MAX seconds apart. Why space probes randomly? I have still not seen any credible justification for this, neither credible theoretical analysis, nor experimental data. This text was introduced because of a misunderstanding of something Christian Huitema said a year ago, and it's been in the document ever since. An initial random delay is justified. Further randomness is just voodoo. [Erik] This was debated frequently in the WG over the past year and in each case the delay was kept in the document. If you really believe that the current text is not reasonable, please contact Christian and see if he agrees with you. As I recall, the WG agreed with Christian, who supported this text and we ended with rough consensus, with you in a dissenting position. See LL31. [Stuart] I disagee. I asked frequently for credible debate, but never got any, and the *misplaced randomness* was kept in the document. (My objection here is not the delay, or even the randomness; it's the pointless inappropriate misplaced randomness.) I did ask Christian Huitema repeatedly, in public and in private, if he was willing to defend this statement that had been attributed to him, but he never responded to any of the requests. [Erik] Requested Change: TEXT NEEDED