Re: [Ospf-manet] Re: Regarding MPR-OSPF

Richard Ogier <rich.ogier@earthlink.net> Wed, 14 March 2007 00:24 UTC

Return-path: <ospf-manet-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HRHI8-0007oy-DC; Tue, 13 Mar 2007 20:24:32 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HRHI7-0007ot-Jr for ospf-manet@ietf.org; Tue, 13 Mar 2007 20:24:31 -0400
Received: from pop-tawny.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([207.69.195.67]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HRHI6-0008Ne-Cl for ospf-manet@ietf.org; Tue, 13 Mar 2007 20:24:31 -0400
Received: from dialup-4.245.101.139.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net ([4.245.101.139]) by pop-tawny.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1) id 1HRHI4-0006jx-00; Tue, 13 Mar 2007 20:24:28 -0400
Message-ID: <45F740BA.9080404@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 16:24:26 -0800
From: Richard Ogier <rich.ogier@earthlink.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Emmanuel Baccelli <Emmanuel.Baccelli@inria.fr>
Subject: Re: [Ospf-manet] Re: Regarding MPR-OSPF
References: <45F5C7BE.6060505@earthlink.net> <45F6A68D.2010008@inria.fr>
In-Reply-To: <45F6A68D.2010008@inria.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 7baded97d9887f7a0c7e8a33c2e3ea1b
Cc: ospf-manet@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ospf-manet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions of OSPFv3 extensions supporting MANET <ospf-manet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf-manet>, <mailto:ospf-manet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ospf-manet>
List-Post: <mailto:ospf-manet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ospf-manet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf-manet>, <mailto:ospf-manet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ospf-manet-bounces@ietf.org

Emmanuel Baccelli wrote:

> To clarify a point which you indicate that you missed concerning the 
> synch router: the willingness parameter influences a routers 
> forwarding ability only. If a synch router is outside the MANET, then 
> according to the I-D there exists a hybrid router which will 
> synchronise with its whole neighbourhood, thus fulfilling the synch role.


Emmanuel,

There still seems to be a problem when a router has multiple
MANET interfaces.  You define a hybrid router as follows.

Hybrid router  - a router which has OSPF interfaces of several types,
including the MANET type.

So a router with only MANET interfaces is not a hybrid router.
Consider a router A that has only one MANET interface, but has
only 1-hop neighbors and no 2-hop neighbors on this interface.
(I.e., Hellos received from neighbors on this interface advertise
only routers that are neighbors of router A itself.) As a result,
router A has no MPRs.  Assume it also has no MPR selectors.

A ----- B ----- C

Now suppose router A has a neighbor B which has two MANET
interfaces, one of which connects it to router A, and the other
of which connects it to router C, which is not a neighbor of A.
Assume router C has the largest RID and is therefore the synch router.
Therefore, since router A is not a synch router (nor a neighbor of a
synch router) and has no MPRs or MPR selectors, it has no adjacencies!

Therefore, it still looks like you need to select a synch router
for each MANET interface, or redefine a hybrid router to include
routers with multiple MANET interfaces.  Am I missing something?

Richard



_______________________________________________
Ospf-manet mailing list
Ospf-manet@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf-manet