Re: nhrp-05 - Purge packets
Bruce Cole <bcole@cisco.com> Wed, 01 November 1995 21:14 UTC
Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa20732;
1 Nov 95 16:14 EST
Received: from guelah.nexen.com by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa20726;
1 Nov 95 16:14 EST
Received: from maelstrom.nexen.com ([204.249.99.5]) by guelah.nexen.com
(8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id PAA27685; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 15:44:06 -0500
Received: (from root@localhost) by maelstrom.nexen.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id
PAA22108 for rolc-out; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 15:53:22 -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 PAA22099;
Wed, 1 Nov 1995 15:53:19 -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 PAA27633;
Wed, 1 Nov 1995 15:40:39 -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 MAA26995;
Wed, 1 Nov 1995 12:48:41 -0800
Message-Id: <199511012048.MAA26995@greatdane.cisco.com>
To: gardo@vnet.ibm.com
Cc: bcole@cisco.com, luciani@nexen.com, rolc@nexen.com,
asmith@baynetworks.com, genecox@vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: nhrp-05 - Purge packets
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 01 Nov 1995 10:34:20 EST."
<199511011541.KAA24899@guelah.nexen.com>
Date: Wed, 01 Nov 1995 12:48:41 -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 Source Address). > > There was consensus that this paragraph be included in section 5.4. [...] > > >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). > > The last sentence in the above paragraph should say, > "when the Request ID is zero filled the match is made > based only on the Destination Address"... > I believe Andrew has already made this point in an earlier posting. Yes, that's right, sorry for the oversight. I've now made both changes. I also failed to revise the purge packet format to include the source NBMA address (which is now required due to lack of IP encapsulation). I will make that change also. There was an additional change in James's message which I don't currently have included: eliminating the requirement to acknowledge purge requests. I am all for this, as I agree with the view that purge packets are an optimization. But I didn't see consensus. Folks?
- nhrp-05 ????? Andrew Smith
- Re: nhrp-05 ????? Bruce Cole
- nhrp-05 ????? gardo
- nhrp-05 ????? gardo
- Re: nhrp-05 ????? - Destination Prefix Extension Bruce Cole
- Re: nhrp-05 - Purge packets Bruce Cole