[88954] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Transit LAN vs. Individual LANs
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mark Smith)
Sat Feb 25 17:26:57 2006
Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 08:56:26 +1030
From: Mark Smith <random@72616e646f6d20323030342d30342d31360a.nosense.org>
Cc: stephen@sprunk.org, patrick@ianai.net, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <20060226084145.07fee972.random@72616e646f6d20323030342d30342d31360a.nosense.org>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 08:41:45 +1030
Mark Smith <random@72616e646f6d20323030342d30342d31360a.nosense.org> wrote:
To qualify this better, there are no DR/BDR on the segment at all,
rather than there being ones that just aren't used :
> Automatic nighbour discovery via multicast hellos still happens, the
> difference is that the routers establish direct adjacencies between each
> other, rather than with the DR. While this costs additional RAM, and CPU
> during the SPF calc, the benefit of avoiding DR/BDR elections, and the
> 'DR/BDR' approximately 40 second listening phase when a third and
> subsequent routers come online may be well worth those costs.
>
--
"Sheep are slow and tasty, and therefore must remain constantly
alert."
- Bruce Schneier, "Beyond Fear"
