Re: regarding ospf las flushing .....

[mike shand <[e-mail]>]

Of course a certain other Link State Protocol has always specified that 
this is what you should do i.e. send only the header, (not that all 
implementations follow the spec in this regard:-)

         Mike

At 00:51 09/06/2005, Padma Pillay-Esnault wrote:
>Anup
>
>This was already done in a major implementation. I think it was a good idea.
>
>You have to be careful though as this might break some implementation who
>access the body of the lsa on flushing ( though I don't see why they would 
>do that).
>
>I'm for it and can collaborate. This can initiate a discussion on the list.
>
>Padma
>
>anup wrote:
>
>>Hello Padma,
>>
>>As per RFC 2328, we send the lsa (header + body) to the peer though the 
>>lsa is maxaged.
>>
>>Considering that the peer would not examine the lsa body if the lsa is 
>>maxaged, *if we could send only the maxaged lsa's header*, it would 
>>reduce a lot of traffic as well as the protocol memory consumption during 
>>flushing.
>>
>>If you agree with this idea, I would like to prepare a small draft on this.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Anup