Thanks for anton's response.
But if so,only the traffic going through this ABR(determined before 16.3
calculating result) is forwarded by the new optimal path.For those other
traffic not forwarded via this ABR(determined by 16.1 & 16.2) in the
backbone will not consider the new path(via ABR) even path is
shorter.right?
Best regards,
Wangjin
Accton Technology China Company Ltd.
Shanghai R&D Center
TEL:+86-021-64859922*6227
E-mail:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web Site:www.accton.com.cn
Anton Smirnov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2007-04-29 17:15
收件人： Jin Wang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
抄送： OSPF List <[email protected]>
主题： Re: [OSPF] Doubt for virtual link cost ?
Hi Jin,
16.3 can update only backbone paths. Virtual link can be laid down
only via non-backbone areas. So I don't see any scenario when updating
path via transit area can change cost of virtual link.
Anton
Jin Wang wrote:
>
> rfc2328 states that when the cost of a virtual link changes, a new
> router-LSA should be originated for the backbone area.
>
> The calculating result of 16.3(choosing another forwarding path
> different to virtual link path) will lead to new router-LSA generation
> in backbone area? This new chosen path can be regarded as virtual-link
> cost change?If no,I feel only some ABR(related to this transit area) or
> some other non-backbone areas attached to these ABRs can get the optimal
> path(via new-generated summary LSA).But for some internal routers in
> backbone area may not be able to forward traffic by best path because
> they get none of new router-lsa notification.
>
> Pls correct me and thanks in advance.
>
>
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
_______________________________________________
OSPF mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
