[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Comments (2) on draft-dimitri-ccamp-gmpls-ason-routing-ospf-00.txt

To: Igor Bryskin <ibryskin@movaz.com>
Subject: Re: Comments (2) on draft-dimitri-ccamp-gmpls-ason-routing-ospf-00.txt
From: dimitri papadimitriou <dpapadimitriou@psg.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 21:33:08 +0200
Cc: Stephen Shew <sdshew@nortel.com>, ccamp@ops.ietf.org
In-reply-to: <006b01c6a507$694fa820$d70010ac@movaz.com>
References: <29D15BBCA340DA4D8146D38B4924FC7A07273067@zcarhxm0.corp.nortel.com> <006b01c6a507$694fa820$d70010ac@movaz.com>
Reply-to: dpapadimitriou@psg.com, dimitri.papadimitriou@alcatel.be
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.11) Gecko/20050728

relaxing seems sensible for the cases indicated here below

-d.

Igor Bryskin wrote:

Comments (2) on draft-dimitri-ccamp-gmpls-ason-routing-ospf-00.txt2.
Section 5.1. The text indicates that the new Local and Remote TE
Router ID sub-TLV is only included when the Ri is advertising more
than one Li. I think this should be relaxed to allow it to be sent
even in the case that the Ri:Li relationship is 1:1.  For an Ri that
an operator plans to start of with 1 Li and then add more in scope,
the processing becomes consistent.

Agree 100%

Igor Stephen Shew Metro Ethernet Networks Nortel sdshew@nortel.comTelephone: +1 613 763 2462 / ESN 393 2462

References:
- Comments (2) on draft-dimitri-ccamp-gmpls-ason-routing-ospf-00.txt
  - From: "Stephen Shew" <sdshew@nortel.com>
- Re: Comments (2) on draft-dimitri-ccamp-gmpls-ason-routing-ospf-00.txt
  - From: "Igor Bryskin" <ibryskin@movaz.com>

Prev by Date: Re: Comments (2) on draft-dimitri-ccamp-gmpls-ason-routing-ospf-00.txt
Next by Date: Revision 02 of draft-caviglia-ccamp-pc-and-sc-reqs
Previous by thread: Re: Comments (2) on draft-dimitri-ccamp-gmpls-ason-routing-ospf-00.txt
Next by thread: VLAN label range requirement
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread