Re: SCTP failover

From: Ryan W Bickhart <bickhart@cis.udel.edu>
Date: Fri Feb 11 2005 - 15:23:06 EST

('binary' encoding is not supported, stored as-is) ('binary' encoding is not supported, stored as-is) I'm not sure switching over to the alternate after seeing a single FR is
the best approach for all cases though. Imagine a situation where the
alternate is significantly slower or less desirable than the primary. A
random FR on the primary may not necessarily be grounds for abandoning
it right away. If you need faster failover, you could change the
Path.Max.Retrans setting to limit the number of consecutive timeouts
that will trigger the failover. Rather than 1 + 2 + ... + 32 = 63
seconds, you could set PMR to 0 or 1 and fail over immediately or in
about 1 second if desired. I think the suggested change to the wording
in 6.4 is actually already covered by the ability to set the PMR.

---Ryan

On Fri, 2005-02-11 at 14:33 -0500, David Lehmann wrote:
> David Lehmann wrote:
> > Randall Stewart wrote:
> >
> >> In any event the only way to keep the network failover time
> >> down is to set RTO.Max to a lower value.. that would make things
> >> faster... To have a 1 second failover I would imagine that
> >> Ulticom's stack is setting both RTO.Min and RTO.Max to a
> >> lower value... aka that adds up to a total of 1 second..
> >> I.e. something like 50ms RTO.Min and 400ms RTO.Max
> >
> >
> > Nope. When the error count is greater than 0 on the
> > primary destination, Ulticom uses an alternate destination,
> > until the error is cleared on the primary destination.
> > So, if the user is using the default values, the user
> > will only see a blip for one second.
> > (...assuming an RTO of 1 second)
>
> I need to correct my former post. Assuming a steady flow
> of data chunks, the switch-over with Ulticom's stack will
> actually be in a fraction of a second since the FR will
> notice the problem long before the RTO.
>
> > IMHO, waiting around for 1 minute while data trickles through
> > the association is not acceptable and does not give the user
> > of a sense of transparent network redundancy.
> >
> > IMHO, the language in section 6.4 should be changed from:
> > By default, an endpoint SHOULD always transmit to the primary path,
> > unless the SCTP user explicitly specifies the destination transport
> > address (and possibly source transport address) to use.
> > to something like:
> > By default, an endpoint SHOULD always transmit to the primary path,
> > unless the error count on the destination is greater than zero or the
> > SCTP user explicitly specifies the destination transport address (and
> > possibly source transport address) to use.
> >
>
>
Received on Fri Feb 11 15:27:36 2005