[OSPF] Question on Virtual Link

Pradeep Shastry <pshastry@huawei.com> Wed, 04 June 2008 04:55 UTC

Return-Path: <ospf-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ospf-archive@optimus.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ospf-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F14663A6BDB; Tue, 3 Jun 2008 21:55:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: ospf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ospf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2F513A6BDB for <ospf@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Jun 2008 21:55:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.494
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.494 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RDNS_NONE=0.1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ha-j-BnH4oNU for <ospf@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Jun 2008 21:55:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from szxga03-in.huawei.com (unknown [61.144.161.55]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 732A13A67D7 for <ospf@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Jun 2008 21:55:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (szxga03-in [172.24.2.9]) by szxga03-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0K1X00JWS9NQIJ@szxga03-in.huawei.com> for ospf@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2008 12:55:03 +0800 (CST)
Received: from huawei.com ([172.24.1.18]) by szxga03-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0K1X002H19NQ0W@szxga03-in.huawei.com> for ospf@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2008 12:55:02 +0800 (CST)
Received: from shastri ([10.18.5.57]) by szxml03-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0K1X00A0G9NHBS@szxml03-in.huawei.com> for ospf@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2008 12:55:02 +0800 (CST)
Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2008 10:24:52 +0530
From: Pradeep Shastry <pshastry@huawei.com>
To: 'OSPF List' <ospf@ietf.org>
Message-id: <003301c8c5ff$216a3500$3905120a@china.huawei.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
Thread-index: AcjF/x96N+R7c428SAmTp3MEpB1sLA==
Cc: tuby@huawei.com
Subject: [OSPF] Question on Virtual Link
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List <ospf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf>, <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/ospf>
List-Post: <mailto:ospf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf>, <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1263832013=="
Sender: ospf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ospf-bounces@ietf.org

Hi,

I have a question on virtual link. As per the RFC2328, under section 8.2
(Receiving protocol packets)

 

The Area ID specified in the header must either:

            (1) Match the Area ID of the receiving interface.  In this

                case, the packet has been sent over a single hop......

 

        (2) Indicate the backbone.  In this case, the packet has

                been sent over a virtual link.  The receiving router

                must be an area border router, and the Router ID

                specified in the packet (the source router) must be the

                other end of a configured virtual link.  The receiving

                interface must also attach to the virtual link's

                configured Transit area.  If all of these checks

                succeed, the packet is accepted and is from now on

                associated with the virtual link (and the backbone

                area)

 

Here the assumption is that OSPF should be enabled on the interface on which
OSPF packet is received (In case of virtual link, to find out transit area
id). Is this is correct? If this is correct then I can't have virtual link
end points having multiple paths, some are through OSPF and some other
through other protocols like static routes, in this case OSPF packets can be
received through the interfaces which are not enabled with OSPF.

 

Thanks and Regards

-Pradeepa Shastry

****************************************************************************
***********
This e-mail and attachments contain confidential information from HUAWEI,
which is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed
above. Any use of the information contained herein in any way (including,
but not limited to, total or partial disclosure, reproduction, or
dissemination) by persons other than the intended recipient's) is
prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by
phone or email immediately and delete it!

 

_______________________________________________
OSPF mailing list
OSPF@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf