Linux-Hams archive - July 1997: confusion over routing with rspf

confusion over routing with rspf

Mike Bilow ()
Tue, 01 Jul 97 14:30:00 -0000

Simon J Mudd wrote in a message to Mike Bilow:

SJM> This is I think correct. Initially I have no specific
SJM> routing information to ax0 apart from the device
SJM> configuration above, but this is sufficient to route access
SJM> to all hosts on the 44.133.228/26 network.

SJM> However another host on the same network, ea4rct, using rspf
SJM> is broadcasting a route to THIS network on the same
SJM> frequency. Here I am unclear whether this is correct,
SJM> tolerated or not. The end result is my rspf daemon notes
SJM> this information and adds a dynamic route to
SJM> through ea4rct.

What should be happening is that you should have a locally established route
with a lower cost (more preferred) metric, and your rspfd should therefore
decline to make use of the announced route from your neighbor. However, it is
legal for your rspfd to "remember" the existence of the annouced route in case
its lower cost route becomes unavailable: this is the whole point of RSPF.
Exactly how this is implemented, especially in your situation where there is
only an implied route in the first place, is a question I will leave to Craig.

-- Mike, N1BEE