Skip to content
Snippets Groups Projects
Commit 2f811c59 authored by Jake Read's avatar Jake Read
Browse files

typos

parent 813a8e20
No related branches found
No related tags found
No related merge requests found
......@@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ It will be difficult to perform one-to-one comparisons between our network and t
However, we can offer analysis as to why we believe our approach is substantially better than current offerings - or has a better problem-solution fit than other technologies.
**Realtime / Convergence Free Multipath Routing**
**Realtime / Convergence Free Multipath Routing in a Distance-Vector Routing Protocol**
- Existing Multipath Routing Technologies offer multipath routing (which eliminates the switching-bottleneck issues associated with switched ethernet), however, they do so using link-state routing that requires each router to share common knowledge about the complete network graph. In the face of link outages or router failures, networks must re-converge - a process that interrupts flows and causes massive increases, or complete failures, in message deliveries. For example
- ECMP (Equal Cost Multipath Routing)
- OSPF (Open Shortest Path First)
......@@ -58,14 +58,15 @@ However, we can offer analysis as to why we believe our approach is substantiall
We seek to demonstrate that these re-convergence times would cause operational failure in NCS, thus eliminating ECMP and OSPF as possible solutions to the NCS problem.
@Dougie
**@Dougie**
- can you try to work through the literature to build this argument, including references to measured convergence times? actually, I looked at the wikipedia pages (bad scholar!) for most of these protocols, and I think that simply stating that these are all link-state routing policies allows us to poo-poo them for convergence - the key would be to find particular references to expected scales and convergence times.
- also, many of these protocols add information to the header, and in the interest of minimizing Message Delivery Times this is BNB (bad news bears)
**Switching Bottlenecks**
**Avoiding Switching Bottlenecks with Multipath Routing**
- In a careful literature review and analysis, we will show that Layer-2 Solutions (switched ethernet) necessarily cause switching bottlenecks that create Single Points of Failure and increases in Message Delivery Times to NCS.
@Nick, can you review that worst-case-packet-delay-time paper and see if we can add more beef to this argument, including some charts & graphs & references?
**@Nick**
- can you review that worst-case-packet-delay-time paper and see if we can add more beef to this argument, including some charts & graphs & references?
## Our Cost Functions
......@@ -104,13 +105,15 @@ In particular, hardware design for embedded systems in the open source (i.e. non
# TinyNet Protocol & Architecture
We develop a switch, protocol and implementation of a software-defined network that:
We develop a router, protocol and implementation of a network that:
- Implements a Multipath Distance-Vector Routing Protocol
- Does Realtime Route Selection
- Does Automatic, Convergence-free Route Discovery and Optimization
- Is robust in the face of link losses and router failures
- Can be arbitrarily implemented in software on numerous microcontrollers
## Addressing
- 10-bit address (1024 Unique in System)
- 10-bit address (1024 Unique in System, scalable by systems designers at the cost of larger packet size)
- Addresses are assigned in software (Ethernet: Hardware Addresses)
- Can be location-based (e.g. first five MSBs correspond to x, last five correspond to y)
......
0% Loading or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Please register or to comment