Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 17:28:45 +0900
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.
diff --git a/ospfd/ospf_nsm.c b/ospfd/ospf_nsm.c
index cfb18a9..5730357 100644
--- a/ospfd/ospf_nsm.c
+++ b/ospfd/ospf_nsm.c
@@ -229,6 +229,26 @@
if (lsa == NULL)
return 0;
+#ifdef HAVE_OPAQUE_LSA
+ switch (lsa->data->type)
+ {
+ case OSPF_OPAQUE_LINK_LSA:
+ /* Exclude type-9 LSAs that does not have the same "oi" with "nbr". */
+ if (lsa->oi != nbr->oi)
+ return 0;
+ break;
+ case OSPF_OPAQUE_AREA_LSA:
+ /*
+ * It is assured by the caller function "nsm_negotiation_done()"
+ * that every given LSA belongs to the same area with "nbr".
+ */
+ break;
+ case OSPF_OPAQUE_AS_LSA:
+ default:
+ break;
+ }
+#endif /* HAVE_OPAQUE_LSA */
+
#ifdef HAVE_NSSA
/* Stay away from any Local Translated Type-7 LSAs */
if (CHECK_FLAG (lsa->flags, OSPF_LSA_LOCAL_XLT))