[Interop-dev] Multi-Topology information with NetJSON

Henning Rogge (spam-protected)
Tue Aug 11 14:20:41 CEST 2015


The new field should be an arbitrary string. It is useful if you have
multiple routing topologies with the same metric.

Example:


{
"type": "NetworkRoutes",
"protocol": "PROTOCOL-NAME",
"version": "PROTOCOL-VERSION",
"revision": "PROTOCOL-REVISION",
"topology_id" : "PROTOCOL-TOPOLOGY",
"metric": "PROTOCOL-METRIC",
"router_id": "ROUTER-ID",
...

and

{
"type": "NetworkGraph",
"protocol": "olsr",
"version": "0.6.6",
"revision": "5031a799fcbe17f61d57e387bc3806de",
"topology_id" : "0",
"metric": "etx",
"router_id": "172.16.40.24",

On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 1:56 PM, Nemesis <(spam-protected)> wrote:
> Hey Henning,
>
> On 08/11/2015 01:33 PM, Henning Rogge wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> while working with my multi-topology code I noticed a small problem
>> with NetJSON.
>>
>> My earlier idea was that the tuple (router_id, metric) would be an
>> unique identification for a topology... unfortunately it is not.
>>
>> We are currently working on "limiting" a topology to a subset of
>> nodes, but still using the same metric.
>>
>> I would suggest adding an (optional?) "topology_id" field to the
>> header of both NetworkRoutes and NetworkGraph object, so we have an
>> unique identifier for each topology.
>
> What's your proposed definition of a "topology_id" attribute?
>
> Federico
>
> _______________________________________________
> Interop-dev mailing list
> (spam-protected)
> https://lists.funkfeuer.at/mailman/listinfo/interop-dev




More information about the Interop-dev mailing list