nhrp-05 ?????

[[e-mail]]

Bruce,
Two points concerning the latest beta version 5 that you posted:
 1) There is consensus on item #6.  Please, include this item.
 2) A paragraph in section 5.4 is missing. Please include this paragragh.

Details follow:

> the issues that were clearly formulated on the list.  There was
> apparent consensus on the first 3 items only, so these are the items
> that have been incorporated into the enclosed draft.
>
> 1. Proposal to move the multiple next-hop entries in NHRP reply
>    to an extension
> 2. Proposal to remove S bit
> 3. Request to document protocol requirements for client-only
>    implementations
>
> (I hope I have addressed this request by adding some clarifying text
> to section 2.2. If not, my solicitation for clarifying text still
> stands...)
>
> 4. Proposal to position forward & reverse record extensions for
>    debugging only.
> 5. Proposal to remove register packets
> 6. Proposal to add prefix mask to purge packet

The consensus on item #6 follows:
Allow the destination prefix extension to be sent in Purge packets.
Add two flags to the destination prefix extension that define which
packet types that it supports for the destination prefix extension.


The missing paragraph follows:
This paragraph allows a Purge packet to be sent to a "station" with
the request-id filled with zeros.

On Wed, 25 Oct 1995 James Luciani wrote:
> To: [e-mail]
> cc: [e-mail]
> Date: Wed, 25 Oct 1995 11:45:15 -0400
> From: James Luciani <[e-mail]>
> Sender: [e-mail]
> Folks,
> I am looking at the new NHRP which does not contain layer 3
> encapsulation and I'd like to make some modifications regarding the
> Error and Purge packets.
...
> 5.4 NHRP Purge
>
>   The NHRP Purge packet has a type code of 4.  The Mandatory Part has
>   the following format:
>
>       0                   1                   2                   3
>      0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
>     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>     |     Unused    | Proto Length  |         Protocol ID           |
>     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>     |                      Protocol ID (Cntd)                       |
>     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>     |                         Request ID                            |
>     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
...
>   be zero-filled.
>
>   When a station receives an NHRP Purge request, it MUST discard any
>   previously cached information that matches the Source Address and
>   Request ID (when the Request ID is zero filled the match is made
>   based only on the Source Address).

There was consensus that this paragraph be included in section 5.4.

Thanks for your cooperation!
-- Russell