Subject: [babel] Forwarding Seqno Requests

From: David Schinazi <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 18:38:23 -0700

Hi everyone,

I'm resurrecting a conversation from a long time ago:
https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/babel/current/msg00455.html <https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/babel/current/msg00455.html>

Section 3.8.1.2 (Seqno Requests) contains the following:

   A node SHOULD maintain a list of recently forwarded requests and
   forward the reply (an update with a sufficiently large seqno) in a
   timely manner.  A node SHOULD compare every incoming request against
   its list of recently forwarded requests and avoid forwarding it if it
   is redundant.

However it does not clearly define what redundant means here, what
should this table be indexed on?

Should the table of pending seqno requests be indexed by routerID too?

Should the table of pending seqno requests also contain the destination
neighbor we sent it to? This would allow to ensure we do not send it to
more than one neighbor, which is a MUST in the spec.

Thanks,
David Schinazi

---

From: Juliusz Chroboczek <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 21:31:16 +0200

> should this table be indexed on?

Right.  It's the same notion as the indexing of the table of pending
requests.

> Should the table of pending seqno requests be indexed by routerID too?

Yes, probably.  I don't think it matters much.

> more than one neighbor, which is a MUST in the spec.

Well, the intent here is that a given request MUST NOT be duplicated
(either by unicasting it to multiple neighbours or by multicasting it),
but it MAY be resent to a different neighbour.  If you can clean up the
wording, go for it.

-- Juliusz

---

From: David Schinazi <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 16:39:57 -0700

Juliusz,

Here's an attempt at text for this:
https://github.com/jech/babel-drafts/pull/6/ <https://github.com/jech/babel-drafts/pull/6/>

Thanks,
David Schinazi

> On Jun 29, 2017, at 12:31, Juliusz Chroboczek <[email-masked]> wrote:
>