[Olsr-dev] Bug in function olsr_tc_update_edge ?
Tue Feb 19 12:35:06 CET 2008
sebastian sauer wrote:
>> the first is a correctness issue
> hell, yes :) i would even say it's a bunch of correctness issues, and
> hennig may have a different opinion than i but i disagree that the ETX/LQ
> in the MIT paper suffers from the same correctness issues.
> it's just us.
let me propose the following:
1. remove the "significant" change check at the receiver side
2. mitigate SPF runtime going through the roof
by adding a 1000ms inter-SPF backoff timer.
3. get CSN into the field
4. move the "siginificant" change check to the sender before
pesting the world with our TC updates.
More information about the Olsr-dev