Re: RFC ietf Drafe Contradicts in NSSA

Don Goodspeed <dgoodspe@EXCITE.COM> Thu, 08 August 2002 18:47 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <20020808184844.74335109EF3@xmxpita.excite.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2002 14:48:44 -0400
Reply-To: Mailing List <OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM>
Sender: Mailing List <OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM>
From: Don Goodspeed <dgoodspe@EXCITE.COM>
Subject: Re: RFC ietf Drafe Contradicts in NSSA
To: OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM
Precedence: list
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Amit,

The nssa-update-11 draft is correct.  Since it's an update
to the RFC, you should always consider it's operation to be
correct.  Just because we cannot state compliance to IETF
drafts does not mean we cannot implement them.

As for the actual reason "why" the change was made, I've seen
situations where an external LSA was chosen by a non-translator
ABR.  The translator ABR goes down, and the non-translator did
not start translating because it had chosen the route from
the Type-5 external (only NSSA reachable routes are translated).

Cheers,
-don

 --- On Thu 08/08, Amit Srivastava  wrote:
From: Amit Srivastava [mailto: ospfisfun@YAHOO.COM]
To: OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 05:03:38 -0700
Subject: RFC ietf Drafe Contradicts in NSSA

> Hi All,
>   I have found a contradition in the NSSA RFC 1587 and
> ietf dratf number 11 for nssa. The RFC specifies in
> section 3.5 2nd last para:-
>
> When a type-5 LSA and a type-7 LSA are found to have
> the same type and an equal distance, the following
> priorities apply (listed from highest to lowest) for
> breaking the tie.
> a. Any type 5 LSA.
> b. A type-7 LSA with the P-bit set and the forwarding
> address non-zero.
> c. Any other type-7 LSA.
>
> While the Draft specifies in section 3.5 2nd Last para
> that:-
>
>           (e) If the current LSA is functionally the
> same as an installed LSA (i.e., same destination, cost
> and non-zero forwarding address) then apply the
> following priorities in deciding which LSA is
> preferred:
>               1. A Type-7 LSA with the P-bit set.
>
>               2. A Type-5 LSA.
>
>               3. The LSA with the higher router ID.
>
> Now my doubt is which one to Follow???
> Please Help
> Regards
> Amit
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs
> http://www.hotjobs.com
>

------------------------------------------------
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!

Re: RFC ietf Drafe Contradicts in NSSA Don Goodspeed
Re: RFC ietf Drafe Contradicts in NSSA Samvid Shah
Re: RFC ietf Drafe Contradicts in NSSA Pat Murphy - (650)329-4044
LSAs with Reserved flooding scope Subhash