Subject: [nemo] RE: IGP and MIP routes.

From: Kent Leung <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2003 18:34:48 -0700

The router will not "break" because it keeps track of the IGPs and
maintains the routing table properly as Pascal described.  Routers
are built to deal with multiple IGPs.  :)

Kent

At 07:31 PM 7/21/2003 +0100, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) wrote:

> > So maybe they want to give an example.  Kent, Pascal, how can one run
> > several routing protocols on a machine and nothing breaks?  I suppose
> > that if one routing protocol adds a route, and another routing
>protocol
> > deletes the same route, then some things might break.
> >
>
>The response is depends on the implementation. One thing is sure, when
>multiple processes (sa ospf, rip and bgp) can insert/delete routes, the
>system had better keep track of whom inserts the route for ownership
>checking and easier administration. On IOS, you'll find a letter like O
>for OSPF and M for Mobile when you display the routing table.
>
>Also, there'd better be an arbitration mechanism that selects which
>route is chosen when 2 different protocols present a route to the exact
>same prefix/length. Since the cost is meaningful only within one
>process, the arbitration is based on an other setting. This is called
>administrative distance in cisco routers.
>
>For routers, managing routes is a full time business - not a hobby like
>for hosts - and they do it well.
>
> > Or, maybe this spec should not care at all about routing protocols,
>and
> > be entirely silent about how MIP interacts with IGP?
> >
>
>:)
>
>Pascal

---

From: Alexandru Petrescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 14:26:38 +0200

> are built to deal with multiple IGPs.  :)

Pascal described a particular router.  I have another router that begs
to differ from Pascal's particular router.  My router won't break either
and figures out which routes are "mobile".

But what of this breakingness can go in a spec if we don't say how
exactly the break situations are avoided...

Alex
GBU

---

From: Alexandru Petrescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 14:26:38 +0200

Alex
GBU