Subject: [manet] #11: Error: failure of delivery to single host can invalidate route to an entire network

From: "manet issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2013 21:39:45 -0000

#11: Error: failure of delivery to single host can invalidate route to an entire
network

 In section 8.4, an !UnreachableNode.Address for a single host could match
 a subnet route in the intermediate node's route table, and current
 specification leads to invalidating the entire subnet route.  This is an
 error.  The intermediate router should keep the route to the subnet, but
 create a host route to the specific host, and flag that specific route
 as Broken.

 A similar error can occur when an !UnreachableNode.Address is reported
 with a !PrefixLength indicating unreachability for a subnet.  If the
 intermediate route table has a route entry with a shorter !PrefixLength
 than reported in the RERR, then the intermediate router should not
 invalidate the larger subnet.  Instead, it should only invalidate the
 part of the larger subnet which is indicated by the !PrefixLength
 given in the RERR !AddrBlk.

 In this way, future packets destined to nodes unaffected by the
 broken route (but on the same larger subnet) can be delivered without
 requiring additional Route Discovery flooding.

-- 
-----------------------------------+--------------------------------
 Reporter:  [email-masked]  |      Owner:  Charlie Perkins
     Type:  defect                 |     Status:  new
 Priority:  major                  |  Milestone:
Component:  dymo                   |    Version:
 Severity:  Active WG Document     |   Keywords:  RERR, subnet route
-----------------------------------+--------------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/manet/trac/ticket/11>
manet <http://tools.ietf.org/manet/>

---

From: Abdussalam Baryun <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 09:54:54 +0100

I solved that in an implemented AODV another way; the intermediate
node (i) should be noticed that a next hop router is lost by receiving
RERR, the RERR mentions what is lost. So if the host destination is
lost only the source or last (i) in the route should be interested not
any (i), others should ignore.

AB

On 1/9/13, manet issue tracker <[email-masked]> wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> manet mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet
>

---

From: "manet issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 21:32:38 -0000

Comment (by [email-masked]):

 Replying to [ticket:11 charliep@…]:

 the intermediate node (i) should be noticed that a next hop router is lost
 by receiving
 RERR, the RERR mentions what is lost. So if the host destination is
 lost only the source or last (i) in the route should be interested not
 any (i), others should ignore.

-- 
-----------------------------------+------------------------------
 Reporter:  [email-masked]  |       Owner:  Charlie Perkins
     Type:  defect                 |      Status:  new
 Priority:  major                  |   Milestone:
Component:  dymo                   |     Version:
 Severity:  Active WG Document     |  Resolution:
 Keywords:  RERR, subnet route     |
-----------------------------------+------------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/manet/trac/ticket/11#comment:1>
manet <http://tools.ietf.org/manet/>