[aodvv2-discuss] Re: AdvRte.Cost question

  • From: Victoria Mercieca <vmercieca0@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "aodvv2-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <aodvv2-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2015 14:00:15 +0100

Hi Lotte,

Yes it's Cost(R) though we didnt refer to it this way. Do you think we
should?

Vicky.

On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 1:52 PM, Lotte Steenbrink <
lotte.steenbrink@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi Vicky,

Am 23.06.2015 um 13:45 schrieb Victoria Mercieca <vmercieca0@xxxxxxxxx>:

Hi Lotte,

If A is sending a RREQ on behalf of OrigAddr, it will include hopcount
metric = 0 I thought. So when B gets that message, it sees zero, then adds
Cost(L) which is 1, so it stores route to OrigAddr with cost 1. It would
then advertise the cost of 1, so a router C (one hop further down the line)
would see advertised metric = 1, and would add cost of link from C to B to
get route cost of 2.


Right, so what we're calculating in 6.5. is actually Cost(R), isn't it?

So basically when sending a RREQ for a router client, you'd set metric to
zero.

Regards,
Vicky.

On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 12:40 PM, Lotte Steenbrink <
lotte.steenbrink@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi all,
yet again, I'm not sure if I'm being stupid right now, but I think I've
found a misimplementation on my part and was wondering if it's just me or
if we should change the wording.. maybe one of you has the time to take a
look:

Section 6.5
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-manet-aodvv2-09#section-6.5>.
Processing Received Route Information says:

o AdvRte.Cost := AdvRte.Metric + Cost(L) using the cost function
associated with the route's metric type, where L is the link from
the advertising router

and then, section 6.5.2
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-manet-aodvv2-09#section-6.5.2>.
Applying Route Updates says:

o Route.Metric := AdvRte.Cost


This (I think) has led me to implement my route table in a way that when
I have (very simplified) nodes A <-> B <-> ..., B's route table will say
the (hop count) metric for its connection to A is actually 2, since it
takes the Hop Count it learned from the RREQ and then adds another hop
(namely Cost(L)) onto it. This doesn't seem right to me; should I get
another coffee or is this an issue (i.e. if B's route table should have a
metric of 1 for the route towards A)?


Regards,
Lotte




Other related posts: