[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Toward Compact Interdomain Routing [Re: [RRG] recent progress in routing research]
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pekka Savola [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> Sent: Monday, September 19, 2005 9:01 AM
> To: Dmitri Krioukov
> Cc: email@example.com
> Subject: RE: Toward Compact Interdomain Routing [Re: [RRG]
> recent progress in routing research]
> > 2) your comment #2:
> > i'm not sure what you mean. do you mean this other 'real'
> > topology from the previous point? we simply point out that
> > for the *real AS-level* topology, the routing table size
> > of the TZ scheme is ~50 entries of ~log(n) bits each, which
> > means that the average DFZ routing table size is below 100
> > bytes per node (that's why this type of routing is called
> > compact :)
> Either would be interesting. If the size of table is something like
> 50 entries, it should be something folks could examine (much better
> than the current topology of 10,000+ entries..) and
> understand better.
> I for one certainly would be interested in seeing what it would look
> like (also in comparison with the current routing table).
it's still unclear if you're asking about how topology *or* routing
table looks like: topology is the real AS-level topology (e.g.
extracted either from skitter or routeviews), while the routing
table at every node consists of two parts: global part = shortest
path routes to landmarks; and local part = shortest path routes
to nodes closer to the given node rather than to their closest
landmarks. both parts are upper-bounded by sqrt(n) in the worst
case and precise algorithms are given on how to select landmarks
s.t. these bounds are satisfied. for more details see refs in
to unsubscribe send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org 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