GMPS Unnumbered

["Naidu, Venkata" <Venkata.Naidu@Marconi.com>]

All GMPLS-Unnumbered:

   I have few comments on draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-routing-00.txt
   (applicable to draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-gmpls-extensions-00.txt)

 * MPLS-TE extensions define Interface IP Address TLVs 
   (Type 3 and 4) as length of 4N. Where N is the number of 
   local IP addresses for that Interface.

   But in GMPLS, why can't we configure multiple "unique" 
   Interface IDs for Unnumbered interfaces? Please allow
   flexibility with out restricting one ID for Unnumbered Link.
   There is no scarcity for local significant integers 
   (unlike IP address) ;-)


 * It would be helpful, if you give more information about "why"
   this outgoing unnumbered link ID is chosen as "unique" in the 
   scope of LSR.

   This is because, IP (Classical) has Unnumbered links defined
   in RFC 1812 Section 2.2.7 - which suggests to use "Router ID"
   (MAY be one of the Routers IP addresses) as Unnumbered Link ID. 
   So in IP context this is not a unique ID. 

   My question is, can we use the same IP configured unnumbered
   link address for GMPLS purpose?


 * Finally, (just for clarity) - In Routing perspective, 
   Unnumbered Links are considered as part of GMPLS drafts.
   But I didn't understand why there are separate drafts 
      draft-ietf-mpls-rsvp-unnum-02.txt and 
      draft-ietf-mpls-crldp-unnum-02.txt
   in signaling perspective (more over in MPLS-WG instead of CCAMP)

   I think they should goto respective gmpls-rsvp and gmpls-crldp!

Thanks!
--Venkata Naidu