Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email firstname.lastname@example.org
Re: Un-numbered point to point. doubt
From: Acee Lindem (aceeREDBACK.COM)
Date: Thu Mar 06 2003 - 09:55:19 CST
Just one clarification - AllSPFRouters (18.104.22.168) is
a local-wire multicast address. I know this is what you meant but
wanted to avoid confusion.
klara moser wrote:
> Hi GKS,
> Actually, on a un-numbered point-to-point interface OSPF will send all its
> packets to the well defined All OSPF Routers "broadcast" address. In this case
> you do not need a uniquely defined IP address for the remote peer. The only
> requirement is that the layer two supports the OSPF "broadcast" address.
> "Farshad (Sean) Tavallaei" wrote:
>>Also, RFC 1586 section 3.2 is a good place to look at. Remember, the virtual
>>links are like the unnumbered links for OSPF.
> Except for the virtual link you need the peer address, for unnumbered
> point-to-point interface you don't.
>>From what I understand, when
>>sending an OSPF packet through a virtual link, you need to know the
>>destination IP address, which is supposed to be one of the interface IP
>>addresses of the remote ABR. If the remote ABR is connected through
>>unnumbered links only, you may not know any of its IP addresses. You may try
>>to use looking for a /32 in the router-LSA and using it as the dst if no
>>interface addresses are available, however, there may be situations where
>>this is just not possible (i.e., no loopback addresses are announced).
>>draft-ietf-isis-igp-p2p-over-lan-00.txt also has some good pointers.
>>Hope that helps,
>>From: Farshad (Sean) Tavallaei [mailto:farshadonebox.com]
>>Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 6:51 PM
>>To: Mailing List
>>Subject: RE: Un-numbered point to point. doubt
>>RFC 1812 section 2.2.7 is a good start. I think I have seen this done with
>>Linux using virtual or logical IP addresses or interfaces, or even sometimes
>>loopback addresses for the unnumbered IP address.
>>I know that may not be much, but it is a start.
>>From: Mailing List [mailto:OSPFDISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM]On Behalf Of kamatchi
>>Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 11:00 AM
>>Subject: Un-numbered point to point. doubt
>> I presently working on OSPF un-numbered point to point support. I need
>>some clarification in implementing this support..
>>Well! to support this un-numbered point to point, the IP need to support
>>this feature. If some body put some light on this it will be great! Yes!
>>even if get some general view about how the IP need to support the
>>un-numbered point to point of OSPF??
>> Is there any standard available for this??
>>Well! what i know is:
>>* in case of un-numbered point to point, the one of valid IP address of
>>other interface will be assigned to this un-numbered p2p. So, that whenever
>>OSPF sends the packet, it will use this IP address as source address in the
>>IP header. But how exactly it is implemeted?? Especially in linux kind of
>>IP. (and stack).