LSA Flooding Optimization Algorithms and Their Simulation Study
draft-choudhury-manral-flooding-simulation-00
| Document | Type |
Expired Internet-Draft
(individual)
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | G Choudhury , Vishwas Manral | ||
| Last updated | 2002-11-05 | ||
| 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This Internet-Draft is no longer active.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
The full flooding of LSAs in OSPF may cause large CPU and memory consumption at node processors of a network with large number of nodes, links, adjacencies per node and LSDB size. An LSA storm, defined as the near-simultaneous update of a large number of LSAs, in such networks may cause network instability and outage. We do a simulation study of four alternative algorithms to full flooding to determine their ability to handle large LSA storms. Algorithm 2 does full flooding but in case two neighbors are connected by multiple interfaces, flooding is done over only one such interface. The other algorithms are based on Algorithm 2 and employ further flooding restrictions. In Algorithm 3 each node asks only a subset of its one-hop neighbors, known as multipoint relays, to flood further. In Algorithm 4 flooding is done only over a minimum spanning tree. Algorithm 5 uses full flooding (as in Algorithm 2) for LSAs carrying intra-area topology information and restricted flooding over a minimum spanning tree (as in Algorithm 4) for other LSAs.
Authors
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)