25 Jan
2016
25 Jan
'16
6:31 p.m.
On Jan 25, 2016, at 12:08 PM, Robert Armstrong <bob
at jfcl.com> wrote:
That's true. So set a bridge circuit cost to 2N if everyone else is N, or if using
delay-based costs, set it to 2 times the average delay based cost between bridge and its
clients.
As more datalink support is being added to various places, it might be worth while moving
away from bridge connections where that is reasonable. Multinet over TCP is a good
alternative. GRE is ok, too. DDCMP (as, for example, implemented in SIMH V4.0) is good.
paul
Paul_Koning (Paul_Koning at Dell.com) wrote:
just setting all costs to the same number would not be all that horrible,
either
The effect of this would be to make DECnet prefer the route with the least
number of hops. That makes a lot of sense to me and I would absolutely
agree, BUT there's a problem...
The problem is the HECnet bridge program. The bridge effectively makes
everything adjacent to everything else, even though the actual communication
goes thru psilo. Thus things look to DECnet like they're only one hop away
when in reality they're at least two.