Re: [RRG] NTP and various proposals.

["William Herrin" <bill@herrin.us>]

On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 4:32 PM, Tony Li <tli@cisco.com> wrote:
>  If your server side ITR can only learn from mapping changes and your
>  mapping function can't keep up with the mobile host, then I'd say
>  that your horse isn't cutting the mustard.

Tony,

Then I'd say it's a good thing those "ifs" don't line up with my
horse. If you'd care to read the TRRP proposal, I'd welcome your
insight.

We've veered off onto an unproductive tangent. This thread started
with "Why should NTP be different when ITRs are involved?" to which
the answer is, "Cache expiration causes jitter."

You wondered, "Why not just increase the TTL?" The answer is that
unless you have some other mechanism that -guarantees- a change of
state will reach the cache, the TTL provides the primary guaranteer
that state change does propagate.

If you'd like to propose an alternate guaranteer and explore the
benefits, liabilities and degree to which it satisfies the
requirements of a propagation guaranteer, lets have at it.

Regards,
Bill Herrin




-- 
William D. Herrin herrin@dirtside.com bill@herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004

--
to unsubscribe send a message to rrg-request@psg.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg