Hi Hannes,
please see inline:
On 12.12.2012 15:49, Hannes Gredler wrote:
for the OSPF routing protocol:
A PLR router should connect to the address
traffic-engineering deployments:
why do we need to distinguish between TE and non-TE deployments?
All we need in rLFA context is a reachable IPv4 address advertised by PQ
node. That should be independent of TE being deployed or not.
- reported in the Router Address TLV (Type 10 LSA) and
- router (Type 1 LSA) ) stub network advertisement and
- the address mask is 255.255.255.255
or
non-traffic-engineering deployments:
- reported in the router-id field of the Type-1 LSA)
- the router (Type 1 LSA) stub network advertisement and
- the address mask is 255.255.255.255
can we say that the PQ node address used for targeted LDP session is
selected in following order of preference:
1. PQ node OSPF router-id, if it is advertised as /32 prefix by the PQ
node itself
2. Highest /32 address advertised by PQ node in it's Router LSA
thanks,
Peter
</added-text>
tx,
/hannes
_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
