Re: [Babel-users] Route-dete :wq

[Juliusz Chroboczek]

>>> My thinking on this is that you only need the host routes when a client
>>> actually roams.

>> This is only going to work if you either use no hold time, or implement
>> the optional algorithm in Section 3.1 of rfc6126bis.

> I'm assuming you mean the ACKed retraction algorithm in Section 3.5.5?

Yes, sorry.  Colloquially known as Chouasne's algorithm.

> Well, that is quite useful in any case.

It's very useful, but it creates extra state, extra timers, and might
timeout over wireless (EIGRP style).  So I'm not really sure how I feel
about it.

(Take this litterally -- I don't know how I feel about it.)

-- Juliusz

___
Babel-users mailing list
Babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/babel-users

Re: [Babel-users] Route-dete :wq

[Toke Høiland-Jørgensen]

Juliusz Chroboczek  writes:

>> My thinking on this is that you only need the host routes when a client
>> actually roams.
>
> This is only going to work if you either use no hold time, or implement
> the optional algorithm in Section 3.1 of rfc6126bis.

I'm assuming you mean the ACKed retraction algorithm in Section 3.5.5?
Well, that is quite useful in any case.

My implementation for Bird (pending review):
http://trubka.network.cz/pipermail/bird-users/2018-February/011936.html

-Toke

___
Babel-users mailing list
Babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/babel-users