[57920] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Selfish routing
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mike Lloyd)
Sun Apr 27 00:05:44 2003
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 21:00:55 -0700
From: Mike Lloyd <drmike@routescience.com>
To: Barney Wolff <barney@pit.databus.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <20030427033518.GA14733@pit.databus.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Barney Wolff wrote:
> Er, nothing in the paper said anything at all about the performance of
> latency-influenced routing vs other, presumably dumber, schemes. Other
> papers, maybe? References?
Exactly my point. He's compared "perfect" latency regulation to
"selfish" latency regulation. He doesn't offer a comparison of selfish
regulation to conventional (lack of) regulation. I've presented some
numbers on the latter at a NANOG meeting before:
<http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0206/ppt/mike1/sld013.htm>
But much more of that, and I'll be judged to have transgressed the
vendor taboo in these parts.
Other places to look include the Detour project from UWash and MIT's
RON. These generally involve "bank shots" off intermediate nodes, not
making better selections at a single node or edge site. I'm aware of
one paper on the latter (not written by RouteScience), but it's under
review, and hence not publishable, I'm afraid.
Mike
