I didn't think so. SIGH...
-Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On
Behalf Of Bob Armstrong
Sent: Monday, December 26, 2011 10:01 AM
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: RE: [HECnet] ROOSTA routing problem
Licenses expired.
On Christmas day?? What a nice present :-)
Bob
b) Connect ROOSTA to HECnet via STAR69. Drop the LEGATO link (as
you said, it's pointless).
c) Have ROOSTA continue to be an area router, and make sure ROOSTA have a
link to STAR69, and then any other areas we care to.
This isn't really any different than "b", is it? The point is still that
ROOSTA can't be in area 6 unless it's connected to STAR69.
Bob
SG1: is down! Licenses expired. Sorry... I'm working on it.
Update to follow!
-Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On
Behalf Of Johnny Billquist
Sent: Monday, December 26, 2011 9:50 AM
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] ROOSTA routing problem
On 2011-12-26 15.41, Bob Armstrong wrote:
I can't talk to SG1 from MIM either, and thus nothing beyond it.
SG1 appears to be down (at least my connection to it isn't working,
either).
It sounds like we can declare SG1 down then, yes. :-)
And SG1 is currently acting as the next hop for a whole bunch of
areas, as
seen from area 1.
Like what? Most of these nodes should have redundant paths (that's
good,
remember :-) so it sounds like MIM's routing table is stale.
It don't really work that way always, unfortunately.
As far as MIM is concerned, SG1 is still up, no matter how defunct it
is. It is still broadcasting routing information, and is still therefore
considered in the route selection, and it wins for a bunch of areas.
If SG1 would just go away, another path would be chosen, yes, but SG1
has not gone away. It is just broken in some way making it appear to be
ok from a routing point of view.
Somebody really should make a diagram of the HECnet topology...
Yes, please! It would be very nice.
Johnny
On 2011-12-26 15.45, Bob Armstrong wrote:
Yes, technically nothing will complain. But the network will be broken.
Right. So Chrissie can't make ROOSTA an area router, because area 6
already has one.
Well, you can have two area routers. Nothing wrong with that. You just have to make sure that the rules for connections are obeyed.
AFAIK, she has two options -
a) Move ROOSTA and all her nodes to a new area, and make ROOSTA an area
router. Of course, we collectively just told her to move from area 3 to 6,
so she might be grumpy about that.
b) Connect ROOSTA to HECnet via STAR69. Drop the LEGATO link (as you
said, it's pointless).
c) Have ROOSTA continue to be an area router, and make sure ROOSTA have a link to STAR69, and then any other areas we care to.
I suspect we have a broken setup somewhere...
Yes...
Nothing is, however, ever easy... :-)
Johnny
On 2011-12-26 15.41, Bob Armstrong wrote:
I can't talk to SG1 from MIM either, and thus nothing beyond it.
SG1 appears to be down (at least my connection to it isn't working,
either).
It sounds like we can declare SG1 down then, yes. :-)
And SG1 is currently acting as the next hop for a whole bunch of areas, as
seen from area 1.
Like what? Most of these nodes should have redundant paths (that's good,
remember :-) so it sounds like MIM's routing table is stale.
It don't really work that way always, unfortunately.
As far as MIM is concerned, SG1 is still up, no matter how defunct it is. It is still broadcasting routing information, and is still therefore considered in the route selection, and it wins for a bunch of areas.
If SG1 would just go away, another path would be chosen, yes, but SG1 has not gone away. It is just broken in some way making it appear to be ok from a routing point of view.
Somebody really should make a diagram of the HECnet topology...
Yes, please! It would be very nice.
Johnny
Right. So Chrissie can't make ROOSTA an area router, because area 6
already has one.
Wrong. You can have as many area routers in your area as needed and
then some.
--
Regards, Rok
Yes, technically nothing will complain. But the network will be broken.
Right. So Chrissie can't make ROOSTA an area router, because area 6
already has one.
AFAIK, she has two options -
a) Move ROOSTA and all her nodes to a new area, and make ROOSTA an area
router. Of course, we collectively just told her to move from area 3 to 6,
so she might be grumpy about that.
b) Connect ROOSTA to HECnet via STAR69. Drop the LEGATO link (as you
said, it's pointless).
I suspect we have a broken setup somewhere...
Yes...
Bob
I can't talk to SG1 from MIM either, and thus nothing beyond it.
SG1 appears to be down (at least my connection to it isn't working,
either).
And SG1 is currently acting as the next hop for a whole bunch of areas, as
seen from area 1.
Like what? Most of these nodes should have redundant paths (that's good,
remember :-) so it sounds like MIM's routing table is stale.
Somebody really should make a diagram of the HECnet topology...
Bob
On 2011-12-26 15.36, Bob Armstrong wrote:
Unless ROOSTA is an area router, that link makes no sense.
I won't argue with you about that... I can't fix it from here, though.
But does DECnet allow two different area routers, with different subsets of
reachable nodes, for the same area??
Yes, technically nothing will complain. But the network will be broken.
The problem/issue is that all area routers must have direct connections with all other area routers, with no intermediate level 1 routers, since that will cause the area routers to have a broken view of how the universe looks. Area routers share information with all other area routers, using special area routing messages that are sent along the links between the area routers. A level 1 router will not propagate that information, but just discard it, as it is unknown junk to a level 1 router.
I suspect we have a broken setup somewhere...
Johnny
