Re: [Ospf-wireless-design] OSPF Flooding and Higher Mobility

Hi Richard,

See below.

Richard Ogier wrote:

> Acee,
>
> Can you answer my questions below?
>
> Thanks,
> Richard
>
>> In the simulations for Smart Peering, what neighbors were included in
>> the router-LSAs?  If only adjacent neighbors were included,
>> then that could explain the lower overhead obtained for Smart Peering,
>> and would also result in highly suboptimal paths
>> (much longer than shortest paths).  That is why simulation
>> results are not very meaningful unless other measures such
>> as average path length and delivery ratio are also presented.
>> (The average path length can be obtained from the numbers of UDP
>> packets sent/forwarded/received, but I did not see those numbers.)
>
All routable neighbor are advertised.

>>
>> Also, since Cisco is running SPF twice, once for real adjacencies
>> and once for all acceptable links, I would like to know how
>> a router knows which non-local links are real adjacencies.
>> Does the LSA somehow indicate this?  
>
A U bit is defined in the unused 8 bits in the LSA link.

>> Is a different Link State ID
>> used for real adjacenies versus non-adjacencies?
>
Nope.

>
>
Thanks,
Acee

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