On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 04:48:25PM +0100, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
> > IMHO for uninformed person the RFC6126bis version of that section is
> > even harder to understand properly than one form RFC6126.
>
> Ondrej, you need to give me more information. I've been staring at this
> document for so
On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 03:22:19AM +0100, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
> Dear Ondrej,
>
> I think that RFC6126bis answers all of your comments except this one:
Hi
Thanks for all your answers. The first comment is clear. The second one,
well, once one knows what to expect then one would understand
On Thu, May 05, 2016 at 03:02:55PM +0200, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
> What you describe is perfectly correct.
>
> > I have two questions w.r.t. this sequence of events:
>
> > 1) How is router restart and seqnos supposed to be handled without
> > waiting for route timeout?
>
> It's worse than
On Thu, May 05, 2016 at 03:04:21PM +0200, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
> > Well, section 2.8 (and in more detail section 3.5.5) specifies that we
> > should keep unreachable entries, but IMHO it does not specify that the
> > old route is considered selected/installed for a purpose of conditions in
>
On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 03:59:35PM +0200, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
> Ondrej Zajicek <santi...@crfreenet.org> writes:
>
> > I have two questions w.r.t. this sequence of events:
> >
> > 1) How is router restart and seqnos supposed to be handled without
On Sun, May 01, 2016 at 03:32:58PM +0200, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
> Ondrej Zajicek <santi...@crfreenet.org> writes:
>
> > - in some cases (e.g. babel_handle_route_request()), check for plen == 0
> >or check if prefix is IPA_NONE is used where check for AE
On Sat, Apr 30, 2016 at 03:15:52PM +0200, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
> Baptiste Jonglez writes:
>
> While I'm not sure what the purpose of this is (a null update with a
> null router ID with infinity metric and interval?) it *is* technically
> in spec. I think the
On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 11:10:34PM +0200, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
> This adds the Babel routing protocol (RFC6126) to Bird. It is a complete
> implementation of the IPv6 subset of RFC6126, but does not implement any
> of the extensions.
Thanks, i will review the patch ASAP.
> Compared to
8 matches
Mail list logo