Re: IGPs and LMP's TE-link

[Zafar Ali <zali@cisco.com>]

Dear Liran,

BTW, I've found your questions rather confusing. Any way, the following are the related comments,

• There is no difference (as such) between the way a TE link is represented by LMP and within IGP (with the exception of the level of details each protocol is concerned with).
• There is no direct relation between UNI 1.0 and IGP. However, once UNI connection(s) is (are) established, one may run IGPs on that (these) connections (either in a bundled or unbundled configuration). But this case does not require any standard specification.
• Multiple component links between UNI-C and UNI-N can be regarded as TE links without an IGP adjacency. But one can run LMP on such TE Links.

Hope this helps.

Thanks

Regards... Zafar 

At 08:06 PM 5/22/2002 +0300, Liran Siglat wrote:

Hi,

I have a question regarding the way LMP's TE-link is observed by IGPs.

In case a connection was established between 2 UNI-Cs over a TE-link (aggregating multiple data-bearing links), does an IGP running on the UNI-C see the TE-link as a new interface (with the capacity of all the data-links) or does it see multiple interfaces (each one corresponds to a data-link) ?

===============================================
Zafar Ali
Cisco Systems
100 S Main St. #200
Ann Arbor, MI 48104.
Mobile: (734) 276-2459, Off: (734) 302-4143, Fax: (734) 302-4190
email:

zali@cisco.com