Fwd: [net2-wg] Collection TEP draft

[henri dubois-ferriere]

On 18/02/06, Omprakash Gnawali <gnawali at usc.edu> wrote:

> > 2. This is a departure from the single-sink 1.x model, so it might be
> > nice to explain a little more about having a tree with multiple roots,
> > and the anycast semantics we discussed in last week's call.
> >
>
> I agree. There is one source of confusion about terminology. People
> who take definitions and terminology seriously might not like the fact
> that there are multiple "roots" in a tree. Perhaps we should call
> those nodes "sink" in the TEP and stick with this terminology in our
> discussions.

i agree -- the current wording is rather confusing.
how about also changing the TEP wording to distinguish between forest
(a set of trees under a single collection_id) and tree (rooted at a
single sink)?

>
> I am also curious about the tree_id. I think sometimes it is a forest
> id. For example, if I configure bunch of nodes as a sink node in a
> network, each sink will form its own tree, overlapping or not
> overlapping with other trees in the network. In that case, we would
> now be specifying the forest id rather than a tree id -- it is the
> underlying system that determines for you which tree you are on. So,
> maybe we should call this tree_id something else.
>
> > 3. Can getNextHops return nexthops to different roots?
>
> I think the current understanding is it can. Rodrigo ?
>
> _______________________________________________
> net2-wg mailing list
> net2-wg at millennium.berkeley.edu
> https://mail.millennium.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/net2-wg
>