[Interop-dev] "id" field for routes and topology

[Henning Rogge]

Let my try to rephrase...

There are protocols that have an "identification field" for each
router that is NOT an address.

The easiest way to make these protocols compatible with NetJSON would
be to state that the "router-id" of NetJSON should NOT be considered
an address but an arbitrary string for identification.

Which would of course mean that IF it was an address, you would have
to repeat it in the "Local Addresses".

Was that more clear?

Henning

On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 5:59 PM, Nemesis <(spam-protected)> wrote:
> Hey Henning,
>
> sorry I don't get it.
>
> What do you mean "we should help protocols like Babel by NOT saying the
> router-id is an address" ?
>
> Federico
>
>
> On 07/27/2015 06:42 PM, Henning Rogge wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> now that we have "local addresses" I wonder if we should help
>> protocols like Babel by NOT saying the router-id is an address. There
>> are quite a few protocols using it just as an identifier.
>>
>> This would mean we would just add the olsr/bmx/batman-l3 main-ip as
>> the first "local address"...
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> Henning
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Interop-dev mailing list
>> (spam-protected)
>> https://lists.funkfeuer.at/mailman/listinfo/interop-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Interop-dev mailing list
> (spam-protected)
> https://lists.funkfeuer.at/mailman/listinfo/interop-dev