On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 7:06 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek <[email protected]> wrote: >> This is no different to how most routing protocols work.
Something of an aside to this conversation, but there is a similar problem in dealing with an external gateway that does not speak the routing protocol either. In my case (this morning) I had a cable modem that supplied IPv4 IPs and a default route, but resolutely decided it wasnt going to forward packets, while I had another cable modem on a different router, farther away that was working properly. The ¨babel-pinger¨ mechanism http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/babel-users/2008-September/000160.html would have been a cure for this... ... had I actually had it compiled. A Nest-pinger (or responder - ) might be a way to keep a route alive.... > (I think you meant "most link-state routing protocols".) > > Yes, to a certain extent. But now we have two distinct routing > protocols -- HNCP and the "real" routing protocol --, which have different > flooding protocols, with different timers and different resiliency. > > As I've said, I am hopefully just being paranoid, but my gut instinct is > that this sort of two-way redistribution must be done with care. > > -- Juliusz > > _______________________________________________ > homenet mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet -- Dave Täht thttp://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/bloat/wiki/Upcoming_Talks _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
