[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: LC comments on draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-gmpls-extensions-05.txt
- To: kireeti@juniper.net, Yakov Rekhter <yakov@juniper.net>, abanerjee@calient.net, jdrake@calient.net, greg@ciena.com, dwfedyk@nortelnetworks.com, eric.mannie@gtsgroup.com, dsaha@tellium.com, v.sharma@ieee.org
- Subject: Re: LC comments on draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-gmpls-extensions-05.txt
- From: Zafar Ali <zali@cisco.com>
- Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 01:42:21 -0400
- Cc: ccamp@ops.ietf.org, OSPF@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM
- In-reply-to: <200204111314.g3BDE5T90036@merlot.juniper.net>
- References: <Your message of "Tue, 09 Apr 2002 13:04:50 PDT." <549063452.20020409130450@nexsi.com>
Dear Fellow Authors:
A way of exchanging the Link Identifiers for Unnumbered TE links (with
interface switching cap of PSC-1 to PSC-4) is missing from the draft. In
ISIS, the unnumbered TE link identifiers can be exchanged using Link
Identifies in the Extended Local Circuit ID field of the
"Point-to-Point Three-Way Adjacency" IS-IS Option type
[draft-ietf-isis-3way-05.txt]. Can you please define an equivalent
mechanism for the OSPF in the draft?
Thanks
Regards… Zafar