On 12/12/2012 16:34, Peter Psenak wrote:
Hannes,
On 12.12.2012 17:05, Hannes Gredler wrote:
in favor of explicit advertisement, i'd rather do 3 rules here :
1. PQ node OSPF router-id, if it is advertised as /32 prefix by the
PQ node itself
2. PQ node TE adress, if it is advertised as /32 prefix by the PQ
node itself
3. Highest /32 address advertised by PQ node in it's Router LSA
ether (1) or (3) is mandatory for the t-LDP session creation. (2) is
optional and not sufficient for t-LDP session, so we can not have it
before (3).
It looks to me we are trying to solve the configuration problem which
should not be addressed here.
I am inclined to agree, and note that the draft is tunnel independent.
We may want a deployment guidelines document, or some protocol specific
text in another document, but this draft can stand alone without this text.
Stewart
_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
