Saku Ytti <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Wednesday, August 13, 2008 7:23 PM:
> On (2008-08-13 17:29 +0200), Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer) wrote: > >> well, an LSR needs to allocate labels also for other nodes' >> loopbacks, so this alone will not be enough ;-) > > All boxes would advertise everything they get, but only generate > loop0. well, this dependency on what other LDP neighbors send is not really in-line with the independent control mode LDP operates in, so the implementation might not be straight-forward. >> However, IOS now has a label allocation filter >> (http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/mpls/configuration/guide/mp_ldp_all >> oc_filter.html) having a "allocate global host-routes" shorthand to >> only allocate labels for /32s (or uses a prefix-list for more >> granular control).. > > Interface would be nice short-cut, as it's probably most typical > situation that you only want labels for loop0. well, "interfaces" would also cover connected /30 or /31s, something you usually don't want to advertise labels for? But wouldn't a (prefix) ACL be enough to cover most cases? Generally, loopbacks are allocated from one or more prefix ranges, so ACLs could be rather static? oli _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
