RE: IESG comments on generalize MPLS documents

[Kireeti Kompella <kireeti@juniper.net>]

Hi Lou, others,

On Mon, 26 Aug 2002, Lou Berger wrote:

>
> You are correct.  Here is the updated text:
>
>
>              IP Address: 32 bits
>
>                 The IP address field may carry either an IP address of a
>                 link or an IP address associated with the router, where
>                 associated address is the value carried in a router
>                 address TLV of routing.
>
>
> At 06:39 PM 8/26/2002, Naidu, Venkata wrote:
>
> >Lou,
> >
> >-> >Will check when I see the text
> >->
> >->    IP Address: 32 bits
> >->        The IP address field may carry either an IP address of a
> >->        link, or an IP address associated with the router ID,
> >->        where router ID may be the value carried in
> >->        the router ID TLV of routing.
> >
> >   There is nothing called "Router ID" TLV in Routing. I think,
> >   you are referring to "Router Address" TLV. Please make the
> >   docs consistent with the usage of Router ID vs Router Address.
> >   AFIAK, Router ID is just a unique 32 value (need not be
> >   routable), where as Router Address is a routable address.

There is a Router Address TLV in OSPF TE, and a Router ID TLV in
IS-IS TE.  They are equivalent; the comment in OSPF TE says of the
Router Address: 'In other protocols this is known as the "router ID,"
but for obvious reasons this nomenclature is avoided here.'

Kireeti.