Routing Guidelines for Efficient Routing Methods
draft-ash-itu-sg2-routing-guidelines-00
| Document | Type |
Expired Internet-Draft
(individual)
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Author | Gerald Ash | ||
| Last updated | 1999-10-22 | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Intended RFC status | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Expired | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft is available in these formats:
Abstract
This draft presents the ongoing work in ITU-T SG2 Question 2/2 on Recommendation E.352 'Routing Guidelines for Efficient Routing Methods.' Routing policies typically used in ATM- and IP-based networks do not fully consider the possible instabilities and drastic loss of throughput that can occur under congestion. Use of bandwidth reservation and avoidance of long paths are recommended under such congestion, which can lead to more efficient use of network resources. Also, there is an emphasis in ATM- and IP-based networks on the use of state-dependent-routing (SDR) methods. However, the flooding methods typically used by these SDR methods to disseminate network status information can lead to inefficient use of network resources. Use of event-dependent-routing (EDR) methods and/or more efficient dissemination of network status information are recommended as other possible approaches to consider. Finally, QoS routing rules are recommended to ensure service performance quality, such as avoidance of excessive transfer delay by limiting the number of satellite hops in an end-to-end connection.
Authors
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)