I did something shameful !! (_)
I missed my calculation, but not that way you're saying.

> What 400k...
>
> What is 64byte size packet times 300 packets per sec.
> I think its 19.2KB. Thats 19,200 bytes per second.<------
> Does anybody have a problem with this extra consumption
> bandwidth??? If you have just 1 sec from determining

I was talking about the case of standard Hello packets.

44 (byte) + 29 (nbr) * 4 (byte) = 160 (byte) # OSPF Hello size
160 (byte) * 30 (nbr) * 10 (times/sec) = 48000 (byte/sec)
48000 * 8 = 384000 (bit/sec)

 384K bps

Precisely, not 403.2Kbps, 384K bit/sec is correct.
384K bps = 48K Bps (byte/sec).

Not so that big mistake to affect that we've discussed.

> that a rtr is down with a 1Gb link, you save yourself
> 100+ million bytes...
>
> and there is a chance that you can save 10 secs worth
> of data . Thats 1 billion bytes..

I agree here.

> Why do you want the full hello packet in the sub-second
> interval? Make it simple and small that their is
> minimal overhead to process the packet and doesn't
> use bandwidth..

The fact that you can receive from router Ra does not mean
that you can talk to Ra. This is why OSPF lists its neighbors.

(not to Erblich)
One says "L2 detection is enough for me" that's fine but
it's not applicable to whole internet users. There surely exist
cases where L2 reachable but L3 unreachable.

regards,
yasu

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]