25 Jan
2016
25 Jan
'16
5:09 p.m.
On 2016-01-25 16:59, Paul_Koning at Dell.com wrote:
Yes, my other options that I am considering is to just set all costs
equal on my local system. And if we don't get a unified cost metric
system implemented, that's what I'm going to do.
Johnny
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
On Jan 25, 2016, at 10:25 AM, Johnny Billquist
<bqt at softjar.se> wrote:
After having my links up and running a couple of days now (and they work fine), I've
come to realize that if we want to have a somewhat efficient topology, we need to agree on
circuit costs.
Now, that said, in todays internet world, network speeds are fast enough that this
isn't really a big problem. So if people don't want to, I'm okay with that.
But otherwise we should try and use some agreed upon scheme for setting costs on
circuits. The best suggestion I've seen so far is to base it on ping times. Would
people be willing to adopt this and implement it all over the place for level 2 routers?
Because, if not everyone agrees, then I'm wasting my time here. :-)
Sounds good to me.
Given that things are basically fast, just setting all costs to the same number would not
be all that horrible, either. But I agree with you that in today's networks the only
really interesting metric is latency.