Re: nhrp-05 - Purge packets

Bruce Cole <bcole@cisco.com> Fri, 03 November 1995 02:19 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa28846; 2 Nov 95 21:19 EST
Received: from guelah.nexen.com by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa28842; 2 Nov 95 21:19 EST
Received: from maelstrom.nexen.com (maelstrom.nexen.com [204.249.99.5]) by guelah.nexen.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id UAA07217; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 20:52:33 -0500
Received: (from root@localhost) by maelstrom.nexen.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id VAA14986 for rolc-out; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 21:01:11 -0500
Received: from guelah.nexen.com (guelah.nexen.com [204.249.96.19]) by maelstrom.nexen.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id VAA14977 for <rolc@nexen.com>; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 21:01:08 -0500
Received: from greatdane.cisco.com (greatdane.cisco.com [171.69.1.141]) by guelah.nexen.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id UAA07160 for <rolc@nexen.com>; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 20:48:16 -0500
Received: from cisco.com (localhost.cisco.com [127.0.0.1]) by greatdane.cisco.com (8.6.8+c/8.6.5) with ESMTP id RAA22654; Thu, 2 Nov 1995 17:56:28 -0800
Message-Id: <199511030156.RAA22654@greatdane.cisco.com>
To: Andrew Smith <asmith@baynetworks.com>
Cc: bcole@cisco.com, rolc@nexen.com
Subject: Re: nhrp-05 - Purge packets
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 02 Nov 1995 12:02:30 PST." <9511022002.AA01468@milliways-le0.engwest>
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 1995 17:56:28 -0800
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Bruce Cole <bcole@cisco.com>
X-Orig-Sender: owner-rolc@nexen.com
Precedence: bulk
X-Info: Submissions to rolc@nexen.com
X-Info: [Un]Subscribe requests to rolc-request@nexen.com
X-Info: Archives for rolc via ftp://ietf.cnri.reston.va.us/ietf-mail-archive/rolc/

> > > > >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 Destination Address).
> 
> Doesn't the receiver also have to match on some other things e.g.
> 
> - that the Purge comes from the same guy that supplied the cached 
>   information: match on Source IP Address or Source NBMA Address

Possibly; may be a problem for multi-homed stations.

> - that the QoS matches what was cached.

I don't think so; of course, use of QOS by NHRP is still under specified.

> - what about authentication? Is that used on Purges?

Sure, why not.  

> - what about NBMA Subnetwork ID? Nowhere is it mentioned that this
>   is or is not allowed in a Purge: presumably it does need to be
>   there in the Purge if an implementation is using it in Request/Reply 
>   packets. If it's there, it needs to be checked.

Yes, I suppose we should explicitly mention purge packets in the
descriptions of the various extensions.  Then the above sentence
could be further qualified to mention that extension processing is 
performed.