[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: FW: DT's review of draft-ietf-tewg-mib-06.txt
- To: Dave Thaler <dthaler@windows.microsoft.com>
- Subject: RE: FW: DT's review of draft-ietf-tewg-mib-06.txt
- From: Kireeti Kompella <kireeti@juniper.net>
- Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 16:34:18 -0700 (PDT)
- Cc: "Wijnen, Bert" <bwijnen@lucent.com>, "" <te-wg@ops.ietf.org>
- In-reply-to: <C9588551DE135A41AA2626CB6453093704759D1D@WIN-MSG-10.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com>
- References: <C9588551DE135A41AA2626CB6453093704759D1D@WIN-MSG-10.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com>
Hi Dave,
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003, Dave Thaler wrote:
> > From: Kireeti Kompella [mailto:kireeti@juniper.net]
> [...]
> > If you give me a list of criteria for what constitutes an interface,
> > I can try to say how TE tunnels differ.
>
> The simplest criteria I can describe would be:
> 1) If an IP address can be assigned to it, then it's an interface.
I can assign an IP address to a router (router ID). Does that make
routers interface?
> 2) Else if you can configure a route in a classic IP routing table
> that points across it, then it's an interface.
That seems way too general and very arbitrary. Can you point me at
an RFC that defines an interface?
> 3) Else it's optional as to whether it's an interface.
Given my druthers, I would not call TE tunnels interfaces.
Kireeti.