Re: RFC3509 applicability (Alternative Implementations of OSPF Area Border Routers)
Acee Lindem <acee@CISCO.COM> Tue, 12 July 2005 13:46 UTC
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DsL64-0002py-AW for ospf-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 09:46:52 -0400
Received: from cherry.ease.lsoft.com (cherry.ease.lsoft.com [209.119.0.109]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA22395 for <ospf-archive@LISTS.IETF.ORG>; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 09:46:50 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from vms.dc.lsoft.com (209.119.0.2) by cherry.ease.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Digital Unix v1.1b) with SMTP id <7.010A2DB2@cherry.ease.lsoft.com>; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 9:46:48 -0400
Received: by PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 14.4) with spool id 78829519 for OSPF@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 09:46:47 -0400
Received: from 171.71.176.70 by WALNUT.EASE.LSOFT.COM (SMTPL release 1.0m) with TCP; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 09:46:07 -0400
Received: from sj-core-1.cisco.com (171.71.177.237) by sj-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 12 Jul 2005 06:46:02 -0700
X-IronPort-AV: i="3.93,283,1115017200"; d="scan'208"; a="648093851:sNHT484943720"
Received: from xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-211.cisco.com [64.102.31.102]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id j6CDjgvq010368 for <OSPF@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM>; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 06:45:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from xfe-rtp-202.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.21]) by xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Tue, 12 Jul 2005 09:45:51 -0400
Received: from [10.82.224.72] ([10.82.224.72]) by xfe-rtp-202.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Tue, 12 Jul 2005 09:45:50 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <44CF9D8D25966C4DB1072958419273DB406828@aunswa002.au.tcnz.net> <42D3C3AE.6020301@netd.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Jul 2005 13:45:50.0952 (UTC) FILETIME=[041DBE80:01C586E8]
Message-ID: <42D3C98E.4020400@cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 09:45:50 -0400
Reply-To: Mailing List <OSPF@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender: Mailing List <OSPF@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From: Acee Lindem <acee@CISCO.COM>
Subject: Re: RFC3509 applicability (Alternative Implementations of OSPF Area Border Routers)
To: OSPF@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM
In-Reply-To: <42D3C3AE.6020301@netd.com>
Precedence: list
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi Paresh, Ajay, There is one exception, in the implementation the section 2.1 "Active Backbone Connection" definition is relaxed from a full neighbor (RFC3509) to any neighbor in state >= INIT (implementation). Hope this helps, Acee P.S. You can E-mail me privately if you have further questions. tajay wrote: > yeah, > cisco follows rfc 3509 implemetation. You can find this by doing > simple tests on cisco router.. > thanks > ajay > Paresh Khatri wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> Does anyone know if the Cisco implementation still follows ABR >> behaviour as documented in this RFC ? >> >> Thanks, >> Paresh >> >> This communication, including any attachments, is confidential. If >> you are not the intended recipient, you should not read it - please >> contact me immediately, destroy it, and do not copy or use any part >> of this communication or disclose anything about it. >> >> >> >