Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email email@example.com
From: Acee Lindem (acee_at_REDBACK.COM)
Date: Fri Oct 11 2002 - 09:29:42 CDT
Manral, Vishwas wrote:
> Hi folks,
> We are in the process of putting down a document for adding IPv6 TLV's for
> TE purposes and an LSA type in OSPFv3 for the same. We would want the
> opinion of the group regarding the setting of the U-bit in the TE-LSA type
> My opinion is that the U-bit should be set to 0, so that any router not
> recognizing the TE LSA would not forward the LSA any further. This I feel
> would help in the case where some routers in the area do not recognize the
> TE LSA while others do. This way redundant TE information would not be
> flooded in the entire area topology in case only part of the area
> understands the TE LSA.
My opinion is that the U-bit should be set to 1 in all OSPFv3 opaque LSAs.
By doing this, all OSPF implementations that support RFC 2740 will support
opaque LSAs. I can appreciate your point on minimizing the flooding of TE
opaque LSAs. However, the setting of the U-bit is based solely on
the function code in the LS type.