manav,

  This should help:

  Eric C. Rosen, "Vulnerabilities of Network Control Protocols:
  An Example", RFC 789, ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc789.txt

--
Alex Zinin
Tuesday, September 11, 2001, 9:56:06 PM, manavsamsung.co.kr wrote:
> Hi Alex,
> I'm really not sure which problem are you reffering to.
> Say a router crashed and is rebooting while the network is
> recalculating paths to it.  When it starts its link state protocol
> back up, it must somehow indicate that it needs to reinitialize
> its sequence number to the last number it gave all of the other
> routers to allow for coherence.  Therefore, it can announce
> paths with a sequence number in a special "initialization set".  This
> initialization set will tell the other routers that this router needs the
> sequence where it left off.  This is the "lollipop sequence" idiom.
> In this the normal sequence numbers keep churning around the
> finite sequence space while reinitialization takes place in a short
> linear sequence space.
> So, what advantages do we get in using the linear number
> space.
> Regards,
> Manav
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <azininNEXSI.COM>
> To: <OSPFDISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 4:57 AM
> Subject: Re: about the sequence number
>> zhang
>>
>>  It was lollipop in OSPF v1, but this approach is known
>>  to have a problem (known as S1, S2, S3). The linear
>>  sequence space does not have this problem.
>>  I think John explains it in his book.
>>
>> --
>> Alex Zinin
>>
>> Tuesday, September 11, 2001, 2:44:45 AM, ? ?? wrote:
>>
>> > Hi all,
>>
>> >    In RFC2328, the sequence number of LSA is linearly
>> > ordered(Page 120),i.e., it is linearly number space,
>> > why it is not lollipop-shaped sequence number space?
>> >    Thanks!
>>
>> > Regards,
>> > zhang

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]