Re: [Lsr] RFC4750: OSPF Version 2 Management Information Base

Hi Acee,

We aren't generating any trap today for the subnet mismatch case. We wanted
to get some feedback on what would be an appropriate trap to generate from
a usability standpoint, if we want to generate one..

Regards,
Muthu

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 7:09 PM Acee Lindem (acee) <acee@cisco.com> wrote:

> Hi Muthu,
>
> There isn’t a specific case for this specific error so I wouldn’t reuse
> the any of the specific ones with the trap. Like I said, some
> implementations don’t generate any OSPF MIB trap for this case. What are
> you doing today?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Acee
>
>
>
> *From: *Lsr <lsr-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal <
> muthu.arul@gmail.com>
> *Date: *Wednesday, December 9, 2020 at 8:18 AM
> *To: *"Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
> *Cc: *"lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>, Tulasi Rami Reddy N <
> tulasi.ietf@gmail.com>
> *Subject: *Re: [Lsr] RFC4750: OSPF Version 2 Management Information Base
>
>
>
> Hi Acee,
>
>
>
> This is a configuration error, right? Wouldn't ospfIfConfigError trap be
> more appropriate? There is no good error code for this case
> in ospfConfigErrorType, though. Perhaps, RFC4750 could have reserved some
> error codes for future definitions?
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Muthu
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 6:16 PM Acee Lindem (acee) <acee=
> 40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Tulasi,
>
> You definitely shouldn’t generate the netMaskMismatch trap as this is for
> mask mismatch detection on hello packets. You could generate the
> ospfIfRxBadPacket but many do not for this case.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Acee
>
>
>
> *From: *Lsr <lsr-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Tulasi Rami Reddy N <
> tulasi.ietf@gmail.com>
> *Date: *Wednesday, December 9, 2020 at 6:11 AM
> *To: *"lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [Lsr] RFC4750: OSPF Version 2 Management Information Base
>
>
>
> [ Sorry, My previous mail was truncated]
>
> Hi ,
>
>
>
> OSPFv2 adjacency will be formed on a numbered LAN only below both
> conditions are met:
>
>            1. Common IP subnet
>
>            2. Matching network mask.
>
> From the OSPFv2 MIB, there is only one error defined.
>
>
>
>      ospfConfigErrorType OBJECT-TYPE
>           SYNTAX       INTEGER {
>
>                           *netMaskMismatch (7),*
>            }
>
>
>
> I believe this is for the case 2 (when mask is mismatched).
>
>
>
> Let's take below example:
>
>
>
>   RTA    (11.1.1.2/24)   --------     (10.1.1.1/24) RTB
>
>
>
> Here, src IP is not matching to the Rx interface IP subnet, then what is
> the error type to be set?
>
> Should this be considered as generic input processing error and
> only generate
>
> *ospfIfRxBadPacket *notification or *netMaskMismatch  *notification?
>
> Should we need a new type here?
>
>
>
> "
>
> The generic input processing of OSPF packets will
>
> have checked the validity of the IP header and the OSPF packet
>
> header."
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tulasi.
>
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 4:27 PM Tulasi Rami Reddy N <tulasi.ietf@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hi ,
>
>
>
> OSPFv2 adjacency will be formed on a numbered LAN only when
>
>            1. Common IP subnet
>
> 2.matching network mask.
>
> From the
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> TUlasi.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lsr mailing list
> Lsr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
>
>