On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 07:01:14AM -0500, Chris Wopat wrote: > > From: Claudio Jeker <cje...@diehard.n-r-g.com> > > > > Thanks for the log and tcpdumps. It seems you're the first person to try > > opaque LSA against ospfd. Can you give the following diff a spin? > > I think this will solve the problems. > > Claudio, > > Thanks for the patch. I've compiled this in a lab and indeed things > are indeed stable. > > lab# ospfctl show neigh | grep FULL > 1.0.0.80 200 FULL/DR 00:00:37 10.1.1.80 em0 18:41:01 > 1.0.0.72 100 FULL/BCKUP 00:00:30 10.1.1.72 em0 18:41:0 > > Out of curiosity, why is the default to terminate instead of ignore > the invalid LSA?
Invalid LSA should not make it into the LSDB and therefor not into the SPF calculation. The problem was, that I added the opaque LSA support in opsfd whithout any way to test them correctly (my bad) and forgot that having them inside the LSDB will cause the SPF calculation to run into those nodes when recalculating even though they're not referenced by any other node. I guess we could ignore these nodes but at the same time it is an indication of a bigger problem and that should be fixed. So in the end the fatals are there to generate bug reports in case something unexpected happens. -- :wq Claudio
