| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
From: Masahiko Endo <endo@suri.co.jp>
Reply-To: zebra@zebra.org
To: zebra@zebra.org
Cc: kunihiro@zebra.org, yokota@kddlabs.co.jp
Subject: [zebra 16823] [PATCH] Bugfix and new feature in Opaque-LSA
handling.
----- * ----- * ----- * ----- * ----- * ----- * ----- * ----- * ----- * -----
Changes 2002.12.20
1. Bug fixes
1.1 When an opaque LSA is being removed from (or added to) the LSDB,
it does not mean a change in network topology. Therefore, SPF
recalculation should not be triggered in that case.
There was an assertion failure problem "assert (rn && rn->info)"
inside the function "ospf_ase_incremental_update()", because
the upper function "ospf_lsa_maxage_walker_remover()" called it
when a type-11 opaque LSA is removed due to MaxAge.
1.2 Type-9 LSA is defined to have "link-local" flooding scope.
In the Database exchange procedure with a new neighbor, a type-9
LSA was added in the database summary of a DD message, even if
the link is different from the one that have bound to.
2. Feature enhancements
2.1 Though a "wildcard" concept to handle type-9/10/11 LSAs altogether
has introduced about a year ago, it was only a symbol definition
and actual handling mechanism was not implemented. Now it works.
|
