[Babel-users] unicast attempt breaks timestamping

[Juliusz Chroboczek]

>> - extend the IHU timestamp sub-TLV to allow an optional timestamp,
>> perhaps only used when sent over unicast;

> I just checked [1], we should be able to do that without breaking
> interoperability.  Nice.

That's by design.  Draft-jonglez-babel-rtt-extension (of which you are the
first author, I'm just too good) says:

   If the Length field is larger than the expected 8 octets, the sub-TLV
   MUST be processed normally and any extra data contained in this sub-
   TLV MUST be silently ignored.

>> - extend the protocol to allow unicast Hellos.

> I don't see the implications of such a change,

Hellos carry a seqno, which is per-interface.  If we start sending unicast
Hellos, we need to make sure that the seqno of a unicast hello doesn't
cause the seqno counters to get out of sync.  I've got a few ideas, but
I'm not going to do the work myself.  (I reserve the right to change my
mind, as usual.  La consistence est le carcan des petits esprits.)

> Signature made by expired key BE01EC22A04E2E46 Baptiste Jonglez <baptiste at bitsofnetworks.org>

Bug in my mailer, or expired key?

-- Juliusz