On Thursday 27 August 2009 02:08:10 Andrew Lunn wrote:
How many of these goals can be reached without changing the packet
format? I've implemented regenerating lost OGMs without changing the
protocol to a degree it needs to bump the version number. Does
removing the averaging of TQ from remote neighbors change the message
My question would be, does not changing the message format so that the
version number can stay the same impose too high a penalty in terms of
Correct me if I'm mistaken but I thought you added the originator interval ?!
In the past we did not only increase the version number when the packet format
changed. We use that number to distinguish different ways of processing routing
information. A packet format modification is the most obvious change but not
the only one. If I receive a packet and interprete it completely different than
the neighbor giving that packet to me the chance of creating routing loops is
high. Therefore any major routing protocol change might require the version
field to be updated.