Re: RFC vs. MIB internal metric contradiction

"Manral, Vishwas" <VishwasM@NETPLANE.COM> Wed, 01 May 2002 14:03 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Message-ID: <E7E13AAF2F3ED41197C100508BD6A328291D42@india_exch.hyderabad.mindspeed.com>
Date: Wed, 01 May 2002 10:02:59 -0400
Reply-To: Mailing List <OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM>
Sender: Mailing List <OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM>
From: "Manral, Vishwas" <VishwasM@NETPLANE.COM>
Subject: Re: RFC vs. MIB internal metric contradiction
To: OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM

Hi Magnus,

I do not know any existing scenarios where a metric value of 0 is used in
OSPF. However in ISIS a metric value of 0 is advertised in an interesting
application. Check the draft

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-isis-ext-lsp-frags-00.txt

It could be used in OSPF for a similar purpose, though I do not assume such
a thing would ever be required in OSPF.

Thanks,
Vishwas

-----Original Message-----
From: Magnus Andersson [mailto:magnus_o_andersson@HOTMAIL.COM]
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 6:18 PM
To: OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM
Subject: RFC vs. MIB internal metric contradiction


After reading both RFC2328 and J.Moy(OSPF, Anatonomy of an Internet Routing
protocol) I understand that 0 is not a valid number for the metric field in
the router-LSA. However in the OSPFv2 MIB it seems that 0 is a valid value.
Are there other situations where we allow a metric of 0, or why does the
MIB say that we can use 0??


--  Note the OSPF Metric is defined as an unsigned value in the range
Metric ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION        STATUS       current        DESCRIPTION
           "The OSPF Internal Metric."
        SYNTAX       Integer32 (0..'FFFF'h)


RFC2328:
Interface output cost(s)
        The cost of sending a data packet on the interface, expressed in
        the link state metric.  This is advertised as the link cost for
        this interface in the router-LSA. The cost of an interface must
        be greater than zero.Interface output cost(s)
        The cost of sending a data packet on the interface, expressed in
        the link state metric.  This is advertised as the link cost for
        this interface in the router-LSA. The cost of an interface must
        be greater than zero.

OSPF, Anatonomy of an Internet Routing protocol:
        Each link also contains a Metric field. This field ranging from 1
        to 65535, indicates the relative cost of sending packets over the
        link.

RFC vs. MIB internal metric contradiction Magnus Andersson
Re: RFC vs. MIB internal metric contradiction Manral, Vishwas
Re: RFC vs. MIB internal metric contradiction Naidu, Venkata