[ndnSIM] link failure

Trade trade20122012 at gmail.com
Mon Apr 27 12:37:17 PDT 2015

Thanks for bringing good point. I did notice there are different ways 
for handling link failures.
In NLSR implementation as well as published paper, they use taking one 
node down
instead of link fails. But in Ndnsim, uses the link down but two nodes 
still can communicate
with others.

One more question, in ndnsim example, both bestroute and 
calculateallpossible route appear
in the main file, then does it account for ?

On 4/27/15 12:34 AM, Christian Kreuzberger wrote:
> As far as I know, Link failures are, as per the name, LINK failures, and not
> node failures.
> This means that in theory two nodes can still communicate via alternate
> routes.
> However, this behaviour depends on the forwarding strategy you use. If you
> are using ndnSIM 2.0 + NFD with BestRoute, you might not be able to
> experience this behaviour, if you use Broadcast +
> CalculateAllPossibleRoutes() you should see the behaviour.
> For examples see
> http://ndnsim.net/2.0/helpers.html#link-control-helper
> and
> http://ndnsim.net/2.0/examples.html#simple-scenario-with-link-failures
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ndnSIM [mailto:ndnsim-bounces at lists.cs.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of
>> Trade
>> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2015 2:00 AM
>> To: ndnsim at lists.cs.ucla.edu
>> Subject: [ndnSIM] link failure
>> Does link failure refer to only one node down or "the link down but two
>> nodes still can transmit message to other neighbors"?  Which one is the
> case
>> in ns3 or ndnsim?
>> Thanks
>> _______________________________________________
>> ndnSIM mailing list
>> ndnSIM at lists.cs.ucla.edu
>> http://www.lists.cs.ucla.edu/mailman/listinfo/ndnsim

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.lists.cs.ucla.edu/pipermail/ndnsim/attachments/20150427/6d6f51fb/attachment.html>

More information about the ndnSIM mailing list