Re: [OSPF] Immediate Replying Hello
<rui.valadas@tecnico.ulisboa.pt> Wed, 31 January 2018 13:43 UTC
Return-Path: <rui.valadas@tecnico.ulisboa.pt>
X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADF24131AA9 for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Jan 2018 05:43:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.309
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.309 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=tecnico.ulisboa.pt
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id icO29WRtb90i for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Jan 2018 05:43:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp1.tecnico.ulisboa.pt (smtp1.tecnico.ulisboa.pt [IPv6:2001:690:2100:1::15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 05468131AAE for <ospf@ietf.org>; Wed, 31 Jan 2018 05:41:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp1.tecnico.ulisboa.pt (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87A2E400C12B for <ospf@ietf.org>; Wed, 31 Jan 2018 13:41:43 +0000 (WET)
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-2.10.1 (20141025) (Debian) at tecnico.ulisboa.pt
Received: from smtp1.tecnico.ulisboa.pt ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp1.tecnico.ulisboa.pt [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10025) with LMTP id trkXJl-0Cie9 for <ospf@ietf.org>; Wed, 31 Jan 2018 13:41:43 +0000 (WET)
Received: from mail3.ist.utl.pt (mail1.ist.utl.pt [193.136.128.10]) by smtp1.tecnico.ulisboa.pt (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00B19400C122 for <ospf@ietf.org>; Wed, 31 Jan 2018 13:41:42 +0000 (WET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=tecnico.ulisboa.pt; s=mail; t=1517406103; bh=aC5yJD9GE7IO7FGBTcOAQLfIuWBDiy5K3MnaLxtf0/k=; h=From:To:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date; b=KJvO5TKurjnnSZut7KQKNehwPst1LQoaHIhw3Wk9mwAUkOkL3PCn22P7B7s7m22b3 6hLbzQttEC9J+e+uq5DD1v9oe7McPjloNdIwoeGYTxV2URjtgG7DcIPz+Ty3wYix6j F5iFCAn/rEUSerjPEfjgGMll37WZKJgPW0ktncw0=
Received: from DESKTOPGVIKOIO (unknown [193.136.221.211]) (Authenticated sender: ist126537) by mail3.ist.utl.pt (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2C3968042EEF for <ospf@ietf.org>; Wed, 31 Jan 2018 13:41:35 +0000 (WET)
From: rui.valadas@tecnico.ulisboa.pt
To: ospf@ietf.org
References: <000c01d39a6d$602ea9e0$208bfda0$@tecnico.ulisboa.pt> <DAAB9EC6-D53A-4639-BC7E-9435D8B97B3C@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <DAAB9EC6-D53A-4639-BC7E-9435D8B97B3C@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2018 13:41:31 -0000
Message-ID: <00b601d39a99$3421cae0$9c6560a0$@tecnico.ulisboa.pt>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00B7_01D39A99.3422DC50"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Thread-Index: AQJZ/wsJp+/ceOVSgGPeDXgyYTsz/wKrU0pGomvWcvA=
Content-Language: en-us
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ospf/yPvoEp6s680KG6R1tQ3v6SFQ0yE>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] Immediate Replying Hello
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List <ospf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ospf>, <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2018 13:43:59 -0000
Hi, It helps, thanks. But the Kou draft (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-kou-ospf-immediately-replying-hello/ ) also mentions two other situations where immediate hellos must be sent: after state changes from “2-Way” or greater down to “Init” (case 2), and after DR election (case 3). Do you know if these cases are also implemented? Thanks. Rui From: Acee Lindem (acee) [mailto:acee@cisco.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 12:47 PM To: rui.valadas@tecnico.ulisboa.pt; ospf@ietf.org Subject: Re: [OSPF] Immediate Replying Hello Hi Rui, It is not a standard. However, it is a technique used by many implementations to speed adjacency formation when a hello packet is received and the neighbor state is less than two-way. At least one of the implementations with witch with I have been associated would unicast the hello. Hope this helps, Acee From: OSPF <ospf-bounces@ietf.org <mailto:ospf-bounces@ietf.org> > on behalf of "rui.valadas@tecnico.ulisboa.pt <mailto:rui.valadas@tecnico.ulisboa.pt> " <rui.valadas@tecnico.ulisboa.pt <mailto:rui.valadas@tecnico.ulisboa.pt> > Date: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 at 3:28 AM To: OSPF WG List <ospf@ietf.org <mailto:ospf@ietf.org> > Subject: [OSPF] Immediate Replying Hello Hi, Many OSPF implementations include the Immediate Replying Hello feature, which I believe is not standard. The only reference I found is the draft “Update to OSPF Hello procedure, draft-kou-ospf-immediately-replying-hello-02.txt” which has expired. Are vendors following what is written in this draft? Is there a document from any vendor that details this feature? Thanks. Rui Valadas
- [OSPF] Immediate Replying Hello rui.valadas
- Re: [OSPF] Immediate Replying Hello Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [OSPF] Immediate Replying Hello rui.valadas
- Re: [OSPF] Immediate Replying Hello Acee Lindem (acee)