Re: Re: [OSPF] draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-graceful-restart-03

Acee,
I agree/understand the, reasons to keep Interface-Id same across restarts.
But the current phrasing seems to imply that reason for preserving Interface-Id is to keep "the pre-restart and post-restart LSAs same".

The phrasing used in explanation below is more clear.

Thanks
Vivek

On Wed, 03 May 2006 Acee Lindem wrote :
>Vivek,
>
>Vivek Dubey wrote:
>
>>Section 3.2:
>>If this were not the case, the pre-restart and post-restart LSAs wouldn't be the same and the restart would be disruptive.
>>
>><vivek> If "post-restart" here means "after router undergoing restart has exited/exiting graceful-restart", it is supposed to reoriginate LSAs as per Section 2.3 RFC 3623. Description in Section 2.3 RFC 3623 does not mandate the contents to be same. Than why do pre-restart and post-restart LSAs need to be same?
>>
>>Preservation of Interface IDs have more to do with figuring out whether restarting router has re-established all its adjacencies.
>>  
>Since the interface ID is in the link data for OSPFv3 router LSAs, a change in interface ID
>could result in a mismatch between neighbor adjacency state for the restarting router and
>the pre-restart router LSA. Synchronizing the change across the restarting router and
>the helping routers would be very difficult (if not next to impossible) and would probably
>result in unreachability or premature graceful restart termination. It is much better for the
>restarting router to preserve this state across restarts.
>
>Hope this helps,
>Acee
>
>>-Vivek
>>
>>
>>  
>>  
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>OSPF mailing list
>>OSPF@ietf.org
>>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
>>  