Hi Acee,

> While most modern routers have a clock with fine enough 
> granularity that will never go backwards, it is typically
>  not preserved across cold restarts. 
> If one used a 64 bit sequence number (for the required precision)
>  and had a relative clock that was never reset, it would fit the bill. 

One could store this value in a non volatile memory so that its also preserved 
across cold rebootd but I don't this would be an acceptable solution. Or would 
it be?

[clipped]

> For one thing, I don't like the fact that multicast hellos 
> contain the session ID and nounce for every router on the
>  network (as shown in figure 6). 

If this is the only thing that you don't like then I am sure this is something 
that could be optimized. I think the bigger question is if the WG thinks that 
our current proposal of using Session IDs and Nonces along with the crypto 
sequence numbers *will* work? If we have an agreement there, then optimizing 
the bits on wire may not be very difficult.

> I won't be able to do this before the IETF in Prague as I 
> already have too many things left undone. However, I will 
> at least make it a point to understand the proposal better before the meeting.

That'll be very good.

Cheers, Manav
_______________________________________________
OSPF mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf

Reply via email to