18.06.2015 01:49, Ondrej Zajicek пишет:
On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 01:25:28PM +0300, Andrew wrote:
17.06.2015 13:09, Ondrej Zajicek пишет:
On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 11:11:22PM +0300, Andrew wrote:
Also, with 1.5.0 I have long OSPF initialization (near 2 minutes - 1.4.5 and
quagga starts much faster). I have OSPF debug log; should I attach it to
mail (does mailing list supports attaches), or should I send it to your
personal mail?
The mailing list accepts attachments, you could send logs there. Also it
would be useful to attach your OSPF configuration. Or you could send it
directly to my personal mail, if you want.
In 1.5.0 there are changes in OSPF initialization, it is much faster in
my test setup but it is possible that there might be some issues in some
border cases. Unfortunately, OSPF initialization is just loosely
specified by RFC 2328 and there are plenty of unspecified details.
I wonder if others have some negative or positive experience with OSPF
initialization (neighbor establishment) in 1.5.0 compared to previous
versions.
Ok, log is in attach.
Relevant neihgbors are 10.255.192.101 and 10.255.192.102, while the local
router ID is 10.255.0.21?
Local router ID was taken automatically (10.255.0.21/32 - dynamic
address). 10.255.192.x - are addresses from other area. AFAIK router ID
may be any, not just IP from connected network.
What OSPF implementation is used by these neighbors? How long it took for
BIRD 1.4.5 and Quagga?
These neighbors work with quagga 0.99.22. BIRD 1.4.5 starts much faster
(currently I haven't possibility to check it - test box isn't near me
and it's down); quagga on neighbor xxx.xxx.202.4 (IP 192.168.255.91)
starts in some seconds (it's old 0.99.9)
