Dear All, Irrespective of whether V is root or not V's Intra Area Prefix with reference type Router will get installed to the RIB. But V's Intra Area Prefix with reference type Network will not get installed, whether this behavior is as expected?
Thanks Rajesh This e-mail and attachments contain confidential information from HUAWEI, which is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed above. Any use of the information contained herein in any way (including, but not limited to, total or partial disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than the intended recipient's) is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by phone or email immediately and delete it! -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Michael Barnes Sent: Saturday, February 27, 2010 5:54 AM To: Acee Lindem Cc: [email protected] Subject: [OSPF] Further R-Bit clarification [Fwd: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5340 (2046)] Hi Acee, Another question regarding the R-bit. If V is the root of the SPF tree (e.g. it is the router doing the SPF) with the current rules it will not install any OSPF routes into its own RIB. I don't think this is really the behavior that is desired. If V is the root then don't we want to ignore the R-bit? Thanks, Michael -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [OSPF] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5340 (2046) Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2010 12:45:00 -0800 (PST) From: RFC Errata System <[email protected]> To: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] CC: [email protected], [email protected] The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5340, "OSPF for IPv6". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=5340&eid=2046 -------------------------------------- Type: Technical Reported by: Acee Lindem <[email protected]> Section: 4.8.1 Original Text ------------- o In Step 2, when a router Vertex V has just been added to the shortest-path tree, there may be multiple LSAs associated with the router. All router-LSAs with the Advertising Router set to V's OSPF Router ID MUST be processed as an aggregate, treating them as fragments of a single large router-LSA. The Options field and the Coltun, et al. Standards Track [Page 45] ^L RFC 5340 OSPF for IPv6 July 2008 router type bits (bits Nt, V, E, and B) should always be taken from the router-LSA with the smallest Link State ID. o Step 2a is not needed in IPv6, as there are no longer stub network links in router-LSAs. o In Step 2b, if W is a router and the router-LSA V6-bit or R-bit is not set in the LSA options, the transit link W is ignored and V's next link is examined. Corrected Text -------------- o In Step 2, when a router Vertex V has just been added to the shortest-path tree and the router-LSA R-bit is not set in the LSA options, Vertex V's links are ignored and the next vertex on the candidate list should be examined as described in Step 3. Coltun, et al. Standards Track [Page 45] ^L RFC 5340 OSPF for IPv6 July 2008 o Also In Step 2, when a router Vertex V has just been added to the shortest-path tree, there may be multiple LSAs associated with the router. All router-LSAs with the Advertising Router set to V's OSPF Router ID MUST be processed as an aggregate, treating them as fragments of a single large router-LSA. The Options field and the router type bits (bits Nt, V, E, and B) should always be taken from the router-LSA with the smallest Link State ID. o Step 2a is not needed in IPv6, as there are no longer stub network links in router-LSAs. o In Step 2b, if W is a router and the router-LSA V6-bit is not set in the LSA options, the transit link to W is ignored and V's next link is examined. Notes ----- This changes reflects the fact that the R-bit and the V6-bit should not be handled identically. The R-bit allows the router to participate in the IPv6 unicast topology but does not allow transit traffic. The V6-bit doesn't allow either. This problem was pointed out by Balaji Ganesh. Instructions: ------------- This errata is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. -------------------------------------- RFC5340 (draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-update-23) -------------------------------------- Title : OSPF for IPv6 Publication Date : July 2008 Author(s) : R. Coltun, D. Ferguson, J. Moy, A. Lindem Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : Open Shortest Path First IGP Area : Routing Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG _______________________________________________ OSPF mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf _______________________________________________ OSPF mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf _______________________________________________ OSPF mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
