Re: TE MIB (-06.txt) : tunnel instance

["Thomas D. Nadeau" <tnadeau@cisco.com>]

At 08:27 AM 6/15/2001 -0700, Sonam Thapa wrote:
>Thanks Tom.
>
>You have been very helpful!

         Anytime. 8)

         --Tom





>-aos
>
>--- "Thomas D. Nadeau" <tnadeau@cisco.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > >Thank you for your reply. I understand what you
> > >are saying and agree that this could be useful.
> > >
> > >However, if 2 tunnels have the same <ingress,
> > egress>
> > >but different instance ids, 2 questions come to
> > >mind -
> > >a) MUST they have the same TunnelIndex?
> >
> >          No, definitely not. You can have as many
> > tunnels from point A to point B as your network
> > will support.
> >
> > >b) Besides Ifindexes, does this save anything else
> > >    at the egress or the ingress over 2 regular
> > >    tunnels between the same <ingress, egress>
> > >    assuming one regular LSP is backing up another
> > >    and is pre-signalled. Seems to me that this is
> > >    equivalent to having tunnels with multiple
> > >    instances.
> >
> >          Honestly, you can do it either way and
> > the MIB will support it; it is really up to your
> > implementation to decide. We did this on purpose
> > when we designed the MIB so that we could support
> > all of the cases I described earlier.
> >
> >          --Tom
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >Did I get it wrong?
> > >
> > >TIA,
> > >-aos
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Spot the hottest trends in music, movies, and more.
>http://buzz.yahoo.com/