Re: Regarding draft-ietf-ospf-5to7-01.txt
"Manral, Vishwas" <VishwasM@NETPLANE.COM> Sun, 22 September 2002 10:46 UTC
Received: from cherry.ease.lsoft.com (cherry.ease.lsoft.com [209.119.0.109]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA05673 for <ospf-archive@LISTS.IETF.ORG>; Sun, 22 Sep 2002 06:46:05 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from walnut (209.119.0.61) by cherry.ease.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Digital Unix v1.1b) with SMTP id <7.00731559@cherry.ease.lsoft.com>; 22 Sep 2002 6:47:51 -0400
Received: from DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM by DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8e) with spool id 225109 for OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM; Sun, 22 Sep 2002 06:47:51 -0400
Received: from 12.27.183.253 by WALNUT.EASE.LSOFT.COM (SMTPL release 1.0f) with TCP; Sun, 22 Sep 2002 06:47:50 -0400
Received: by XOVER.dedham.mindspeed.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <S1D0BLTX>; Sun, 22 Sep 2002 06:47:50 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID: <E7E13AAF2F3ED41197C100508BD6A328791684@india_exch.hyderabad.mindspeed.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2002 06:49:57 -0400
Reply-To: Mailing List <OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM>
Sender: Mailing List <OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM>
From: "Manral, Vishwas" <VishwasM@NETPLANE.COM>
Subject: Re: Regarding draft-ietf-ospf-5to7-01.txt
To: OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM
Precedence: list
Regarding a) I guess we already do it for NSSA anyway setting the E-bit, so it would already be done for the type5to7 already, so the issue would not hold. Thanks, Vishwas -----Original Message----- From: Manral, Vishwas [mailto:VishwasM@NETPLANE.COM] Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2002 2:54 PM To: OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM Subject: Regarding draft-ietf-ospf-5to7-01.txt Hi Pat, Two small comments: - a) Shouldn't the translator now set the E-bit in its router LSA into the NSSA area because according to step 3 Section 3.5 of the NSSA draft none of the translated NSSA LSA's would be considered for the routing table calculation and the entire purpose of 5to7 would be defeated. I couldn't find the fact stated in the draft. Or did I miss it? b) Regarding the translator election for the elected translator, we could as well just have the guy with the lowest router-id become translator this can be done without actually adding any change to packets and can be done as part of the 7to5 translator election. Thanks, Vishwas
- Regarding draft-ietf-ospf-5to7-01.txt Manral, Vishwas
- Re: Regarding draft-ietf-ospf-5to7-01.txt Manral, Vishwas
- Re: Regarding draft-ietf-ospf-5to7-01.txt Pat Murphy - (650)329-4044