OSPF-lite
draft-thomas-hunter-reed-ospf-lite-00
| Document | Type |
Expired Internet-Draft
(individual)
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Author | Matthew Thomas | ||
| Last updated | 2007-08-31 | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Intended RFC status | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Expired | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft is available in these formats:
Abstract
This memo documents OSPF-lite. OSPF-lite is a link state routing protocol, and a branch version of Internet Standard 54 OSPF [ref1]. It is designed to be run internal to a single Autonomous System. Each OSPF-lite router maintains an identical database describing the Autonomous System's topology. From this database, a routing table is calculated by constructing a shortest-path tree. OSPF-lite has been designed to provide a simpler version of the OSPF protocol. A router running ospf-lite requires little configuration. Areas are not implemented and all designated Router functionality has been removed from the protocol. OSPF-lite will run over non fully meshed clouds with no special OSPF configuration commands required. Many of the Protocol complexities have been removed, and processor overhead utilised in a different way. This work is intended to keep pace with the vast increases in processor performance, memory size and link capacity since OSPF was originally designed in 1989, with the resulting benefits of simpler network design, configuration and maintenance. The differences between this memo and RFC 2328 are highlighted throughout the document, but special attention should be placed on Sections 2, 7, 16, and Appendix A; the latter describes detailed packet structures. Many of the differences are backward compatible in nature, but it is not envisioned that OSPF Version 2 will interoperate with OSPF-lite, unless multiple instances are running and route redistribution is employed. The protocol has been designed with backward consistency in mind, as far has been possible, to allow code modules developed for OSPF Version 2 to be re-utilised. This Internet Draft has been written within the same structure as RFC 2328, to enable a section-by-section comparison with previous versions of the main OSPF protocol. It is recommended that the sections are directly compared. The authors’ thanks in turn go the developers of all of the features in RFC 2328, and associated RFCs, and Standards.
Authors
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)