Re: LAN flooding.

Gurudatta Parulkar (parulkar@dewey.udel.EDU)
Fri, 11 Apr 86 09:53:02 -0500

Thank you very much for asking the following question. So let me take this
opportunity to elaborate little more of NOAHnet, the flood LAN we are
developing. Noahnet uses a graph like topology with 4-5 interconnections per
node. It uses a "kind of flooding" to route all data messages around the
network and it does not do store and forward. Every node starts forwarding an
incoming message to all its UNOCCUPIED adjacent nodes as soon as it receives
the first (couple of) bit(s) (one may think of it as
a kind of circuit switching). Thus, delay at each node is very small.
It uses short status and command messages to release nodes which don't
form successful path. In short, our claims are that

1. Graph like topology should provide required reliability to LANs.

2. The topology and our flooding protocol permit multiple messages to
be active in the network at any time.

3. Flooding associated with no store and forward provide fast routing strategy.

4. Any thing that you can think of !

Noahnet nodes will be more expensive than other LAN interfaces but not
order of magnitude. Flooding looks wasteful, but the modified flooding
does not seem to be THAT (?) wasteful. We are doing formal performance
analysis to prove (disprove!) these claims.

I hope that it gives a better picture of what we are doing. So WHAT DO
THINK ?? We do have few tech reports describing the Noahnet effort, in case,
you would like to see more details.

Thanks for your attention.


>>We at University of Delaware are exploring the possibility of using
>>flooding in a LAN. Are there any other groups looking into such a
>>possibility ? Please send me a note.

> Maybe I missed something here. The LANs I know of all have a broadcast
> address available to them. Why would you want to flood a LAN when one
> packet will do?

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Mar 09 2000 - 14:36:05 GMT