On Oct 7, 2011, at 10:17 PM, Fred Baker wrote:

> 
> On Oct 7, 2011, at 6:55 PM, Erik Nordmark wrote:
> 
>> On 10/7/11 3:28 AM, Fred Baker wrote:
>>> The other parameters in question include
>>>  - the interface prefix itself, which could be derived as in zospf,
>>>  - the area number (I'd suggest it default to zero),
>>>  - the router ID (a random 32 bit number), and
>>>  - security information.
>> 
>> Fred,
>> 
>> Do existing OSPF implementations have the ability to pick a random router 
>> ID, and detect when there is a router ID collision?
> 
> OSPFv2 implementations generally pick one of the IPv4 addresses of the 
> system. Not sure I can make a general comment on OSPFv3.

Since OSPFv3 also uses a 4 byte router ID, our implementation will use the same 
algorithm for picking a router ID as OSPFv2. 


> 
>> One benefit of using IS-IS is that the router ID is longer and based on a 
>> factory-assigned IEEE MAC address.
> 
>> The zospf appears to have an approach for router ID collisions, but that 
>> probably isn't (widely) implemented.
> 
> ZOSPF is, AFAIK, an internet draft that has never been implemented.

Agreed. The 2002 draft died with its expiration in 2003. 

Acee

> 
>> (In any case, we'd need to figure out what it means to have stable prefixes 
>> allocated - to interfaces or to links - but that is the prefix autoconfig 
>> part of the problem as opposed to the router config part of the problem.)
>> 
>>  Erik
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> homenet mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet

_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet

Reply via email to