From: David Hiers (David_Hiers@adp.com)
Date: Fri Apr 23 2004 - 19:06:07 GMT-3
This sure sounds like a homework problem. If your boss (or whatever) is going to try to read an RFC, he needs to learn how to do it properly.
1. Read the entire RFC
2. Understand the meaning of the word "can" in 5.2.4.2.2.c
3. Quit ignoring 2.2.5.2 and 5.2.4.3
David
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
BALAKRISHNAN Balaji
Sent: Friday, April 23, 2004 10:30 AM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RFC 1812 " Requirements for IP Version 4 Routers" ??
Hi group,
I have a clarification on RFC1812 about route forwarding decision..
When a router received a packet, if the destination ip is part of its
directly connected interface subnet , it will do the arp request for
that destination ip out to that interface. Now, we can change that
behavior by configuring more specific route for that destination ( say
/32 host route) pointing to different gateway. On this case, router
forwards the packet to the next-hop defined. right ???
But my manager don't agree with that. He says if destination IP address
in the packet is on the same subnet as any Ethernet interface of the
router, then the router should not do any route lookup at all, and must
immediately forward the packet on that matching interface . Ie. more
specific route present in the router's routing table is then not
relevant. He pointing to the RFC 1812 section "5.2.4.2 Local/Remote
decision ". The section goes line this ..the following algorithm MUST be
used to determine if the Immediate Destination is directly accessible
quote
* isolate the network prefix used by the interface.
* Isolate the corresponding set of bits from the IP Destination
Address of the packet.
* Compare the resulting network prefixes. If they are equal to each
other, the packet can be transmitted through the corresponding network
interface.
* If the destination was not a member of a directly connected network
prefix, the IP Destination is accessible only through some other
router.
unquote
I believe it does not consider all the possibilities for a route
decision. Do anybody know better RFC reference that I can point to my
manager to prove that I am right ???
- bala.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon May 03 2004 - 19:48:54 GMT-3