[rbridge] Consensus Check: Announcing Root
Radia.Perlman at sun.com
Sun Oct 7 20:38:14 PDT 2007
Good point. There might be no bridges. So there has to be a way of encoding that. Anything such as:
a) leaving out the TLV in which one announces the root bridge
b) using a flag to say "no root"
c) using a special address, say 0
or I'm sure there are lots of possibilities.
----- Original Message -----
From: Eastlake III Donald-LDE008 <Donald.Eastlake at motorola.com>
Date: Saturday, October 6, 2007 12:46 pm
Subject: [rbridge] Consensus Check: Announcing Root
> This is a check via the mailing list on a slight modification of an
> apparent consensus from the minutes of the Chicago meeting for a
> changefrom protocol draft -05. The tentative consensus at the
> Chicago meeting
> It is mandatory for an RBridge to announce the bridge root that
> it sees out each physical port.
> Based on mailing list discussion, I would like to tweak this as
> An Rbridge MUST parse BPDUs it receives on a port and announce
> in the core IS-IS instance the bridge root that it sees out
> each port. For MSTP (Multiple Spanning Tree Protocol), this is
> the CIST (Common and Internal Spanning Tree) root.
> I have a question in connection with this. What is announced for the
> port if no BPDU has been received recently or ever? Should there be a
> "root MAC address valid" flag per port or should there some
> conventionalvalue, like zero, which is announced?
> rbridge mailing list
> rbridge at postel.org
More information about the rbridge