[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [ippm] Re: need of sync of clocks in dup metric def



Al Morton wrote:
At 04:15 AM 10/19/2007, Henk Uijterwaal wrote:
...Your idea would be: send packet at time T, wait for the first copy
to arrive, count the number of additional copies, in other words,
arrive in the interval [T+OWD, T+OWD+delta].  That could work too but
makes the definition somewhat incompatible with the loss definition.

I don't understand the value of a relative waiting time as described above. It might be worth thinking about characterizing the time between arrival of the first packet and subsequent copies, but it would clearly be a secondary sort of metric w.r.t. the duplication itself.

Neither do I, I just said that I can write a definition like this but before I do so, I like to see some arguments why.

Henk



--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Henk Uijterwaal                           Email: henk.uijterwaal(at)ripe.net
RIPE Network Coordination Centre          http://www.amsterdamned.org/~henk
P.O.Box 10096          Singel 258         Phone: +31.20.5354414
1001 EB Amsterdam      1016 AB Amsterdam  Fax: +31.20.5354445
The Netherlands        The Netherlands    Mobile: +31.6.55861746
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is one of the choices leaving the office open?
                                      Alan Greenspan on the next elections

_______________________________________________
ippm mailing list
ippm at ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm