New Request for Comments are now available from the Network
Information Center in the online library at NIC@NIC.DDN.MIL.

Note: These are PostScript RFCs, secondary versions are available in
ASCII.  The secondary ASCII versions may lack figures and the
information encoded in typographic variation (italics, boldface,
etc.).  Since this information often provides essential context, the
ASCII versions are at best incomplete and at worst misleading.  Anyone
expecting to understand these documents is strongly encouraged to obtain
the PostScript versions.


	RFC 1245:

        Title:      OSPF Protocol Analysis
       	Author:     J. Moy, Editor
	Mailbox:    jmoy@proteon.com
        PS-Pages:  15           ASCII-Pages:  12
        PS-Characters:  62,009  ASCII-Characters:  26,819
	Obsoletes/Updates:  none

		pathname: rfc/rfc1245.ps


This is the first of two reports on the OSPF protocol.  These reports
are required by the IAB/IESG in order for an Internet routing protocol
to advance to Draft Standard Status.  OSPF is a TCP/IP routing
protocol, designed to be used internal to an Autonomous System (in
other words, OSPF is an Interior Gateway Protocol).

Version 1 of the OSPF protocol was published in RFC 1131.  Since then
OSPF version 2 has been developed.  Version 2 has been documented in RFC
1247.  The changes between version 1 and version 2 of the OSPF protocol
are explained in Appendix F of RFC 1247.  It is OSPF Version 2 that is
the subject of this report.

This report attempts to summarize the key features of OSPF V2.  It also
attempts to analyze how the protocol will perform and scale in the
Internet.

This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not
specify any Internet standard.  Distribution of this memo is
unlimited.


	RFC 1246:

        Title:      Experience with the OSPF Protocol    
       	Author:     J. Moy, Editor
	Mailbox:    jmoy@proteon.com
        PS-Pages:  38           ASCII-Pages:  31
        PS-Characters:  141,924 ASCII-Characters:  70441
	Obsoletes/Updates:  none

		pathname: rfc/rfc1246.ps


This is the second of two reports on the OSPF protocol.  These reports
are required by the IAB/IESG in order for an Internet routing protocol
to advance to Draft Standard Status.  OSPF is a TCP/IP routing protocol,
designed to be used internal to an Autonomous System (in other words,
OSPF is an Interior Gateway Protocol).

OSPF is currently designated as a Proposed Standard.  Version 1 of the
OSPF protocol was published in RFC 1131.  Since then OSPF version 2 has
been developed.  Version 2 has been documented in RFC 1247.  The changes
between version 1 and version 2 of the OSPF protocol are explained in
Appendix F of RFC 1247.  It is OSPF Version 2 that is the subject of this
report.

This report documents experience with OSPF V2.  This includes reports
on interoperability testing, field experience, simulations and the
current state of OSPF implementations.  It also presents a summary of
the OSPF Management Information Base (MIB), and a summary of OSPF
authentication mechanism.

This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not
specify any Internet standard.  Distribution of this memo is
unlimited.

This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list.
Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list
should be sent to IETF-REQUEST@NRI.RESTON.VA.US.  Requests to be added
to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to
RFC-REQUEST@NIC.DDN.MIL.

Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending
an EMAIL message to "rfc-info@ISI.EDU" with the message body
"help: ways_to_get_rfcs".  For example:

        To: rfc-info@ISI.EDU
        Subject: getting rfcs

        help: ways_to_get_rfcs

Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
author of the RFC in question, or to NIC@NIC.DDN.MIL.  Unless
specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
unlimited distribution.

Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to
RFC-EDITOR@ISI.EDU.  Please consult RFC 1111, "Instructions to RFC
Authors", for further information.


Joyce K. Reynolds
USC/Information Sciences Institute