Subject: [manet] Help me with AODV destination sequence number

From: Cindy <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 15:14:29 +1000

Hi,

i've been thinking about the effect of destination sequence 
number in AODV routing protocol, and wanna make something 
more clear about it.

according to the RFC 3651 page 17, when an forwarding node 
received a RREQ, but does not generate a RREP (does not have 
an active route towards the destination, or the "destination 
only" flag is set, the forwarding node will update the 
destination sequence number in RREQ by "set to the maximum 
of the corresponding value received in the RREQ message, and 
the destination sequence value currently maintained by the 
node for the requested destination". 

so, does this mean the destination sequence number in RREQ 
might be changed during the transmission? but what the 
effect of updating the destination sequence number during 
the transmission of RREQ, since all the forwarding node will 
no update their route table entry regarding to that 
destination untill the RREP is sent back?

I'll really appreciate quick answers. 
Thanks a lot!
Cindy

_______________________________________________
manet mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet

---

From: Cindy <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 18:35:51 +1000

Hi Jackson,

Thanks for your reply!

In the RFC, same place, it also says "the forwarding node 
MUST NOT modify its maintained value for the destination 
sequence number, even if the value received in the incoming 
RREQ is larger than the value currently maintained by the 
forwarding node". so the part setting to maximum should be 
targeting the RREQ, am i right? 

Cheers
Cindy

---

From: Cindy <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 22:20:39 +1000

Hi Jackson,

I agree. At this stage, can we draw the conclusion that the 
DNS number in RREQ might be changed during transmission? if 
so, it almost implies that their security adds-on: SAODV, is 
completely Wrong! because it assume thes DSN field will not 
be changed, and simply put a signature over it... well, 
that's where my unsureness comes from, cos i don't believe 
the internet draft of SAODV is wrong. 

Goodnight
Cindy