<... snip> > > As for the comment from John Moy (circa July 2001) about the > > availability of an inter-area OSPF draft, I do recall responding > > that the inter-area draft was assuming additive properties to > > TE metrics to advertise summary info. It is a mistake to assume > > that all TE metrics can be additive. Below is a pointer to > > the response I sent. > > > http://discuss.microsoft.com/SCRIPTS/WA-MSD.EXE?A2=ind0108&L=ospf&; > T=0&F=&S=& > > P=5937 > > Please look at draft-kompella-mpls-multiarea-te-03.txt, as > at least some of the approaches described in that draft > do *not* assume additive properties of TE metrics (and do not > advertise summary info). > > Yakov. >
Yakov - You are right. The draft does talk about different mechanisms the MPLS signaling protocols could use to setup LSPs in an AS spanning multiple areas. However, the draft is not about inter-area OSPF TE. Clearly, there is interplay between signalling protocols and the extent of TE link state data base (TE-LSDB) a node has. I believe, scenario-3 is where the inter-area OSPF-TE is in place and all nodes in an area have the same information as their ABRs do. This scenario presents the signalling protocols with fast convergence in settign up an LSP, right. regards, suresh
