Re: [Babel-users] ANNOUNCE: important babels update.

A new *incompatible* version of Babels is available. It is incompatible because we have changed the Source Specific Update TLV's format. Matthieu, I cannot find the Source Omitted field any longer. Did you remove it? -- Juliusz ___ Babel-users

Re: [Babel-users] ANNOUNCE: important babels update.

Matthieu, I cannot find the Source Omitted field any longer. Did you remove it? Yes, it's not a mistake. The Idea is that you will sort your TLVs by lexicographic (dst, src) in a Babel packet. Usually, the source prefix will not begin the same than the destination prefix cached: -

Re: [Babel-users] ANNOUNCE: important babels update.

Suppose my network has prefixes 2001:bad:c0ff:ee::/64 and 2001:0dd:f00d:1/64. Then I'll see: 1. 64 routes towards both prefixes, typically /128; 2. default routes from both /64. If I place the source-specific after the right /128, I can compress the source prefix. so you earn 14 bytes

Re: [Babel-users] ANNOUNCE: important babels update.

If I place the source-specific after the right /128, I can compress the source prefix. so you earn 14 bytes in one packet... (?) Hmm... you may have a point. Ok, I'm now convinced you're right. I haven't looked at the latest version of your code yet, but if the packet parser is not too

[Babel-users] ANNOUNCE: important babels update.

Dear all, A new *incompatible* version of Babels is available. It is incompatible because we have changed the Source Specific Update TLV's format. The source-sensitive branch of my public repositories has been forced-updated. All branches are rebased on the 1.5.1 version. Please update all

Re: [Babel-users] ANNOUNCE: important babels update.

A new *incompatible* version of Babels is available. It is incompatible because we have changed the Source Specific Update TLV's format. Note that we've not frozen the packet format yet -- we reserve the right to break your routers again, just to be annoying. However, we've started