14 Jan
2016
14 Jan
'16
10:16 p.m.
On 2016-01-14 21:59, Paul_Koning at Dell.com wrote:
We observed VMS and RSX, and they both seemed to act as expected.
However, it is obviously not ideal under these circumstances. But as
there are only one path (ethernet), this tiebreaker is all there is.
Some kind of router priority value, independent of the node number,
would have been useful. But that's life.
Johnny
On Jan 14, 2016, at 3:32 PM, Johnny Billquist
<bqt at softjar.se> wrote:
...
The situation where you loose is when you go from one area to another, and you have
several area routers on the same ethernet segment you yourself are on. In this situation,
DECnet will pick the highest numbered node in the remote area,
Yes, and indeed that is the tiebreaking rule for equal cost paths in general. I had
forgotten that. It would not surprise me if that particular detail is not always
implemented according to the spec.