[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Repost: Use of Unnumbered Interface ID

To: "Michael I Mandelberg(Isaac)" <mmandelberg@fwion.com>
Subject: Re: Repost: Use of Unnumbered Interface ID
From: Yakov Rekhter <yakov@juniper.net>
Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2002 08:51:20 -0700
Cc: ccamp@ops.ietf.org
In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 09 Sep 2002 11:25:57 EDT." <A65124DA4C87D51180B100D0B7C9EB593FE536@mailsrv03>

Michael,

> draft-ietf-mpls-rsvp-unnum-07.txt states that:
> 
>    With this in mind, the ERO processing in the presence of the
>    Unnumbered Interface ID subobject follows the rules specified in
>    section 4.3.4.1 of [RSVP-TE].
> 
> If the Unnumbered Interface ID subobject is used, is the IPv4 Prefix
> subobject defined in 3209 still required?

The Unnumbered Interface ID subobject is used for unnumbered interfaces,
the IPv4 Prefix subobject is used for numbered interfaces.

Yakov.

References:
- Repost: Use of Unnumbered Interface ID
  - From: "Michael I Mandelberg(Isaac)" <mmandelberg@fwion.com>

Prev by Date: Repost: Use of Unnumbered Interface ID
Next by Date: Vendor-Specific Class-Num availability
Previous by thread: Repost: Use of Unnumbered Interface ID
Next by thread: Vendor-Specific Class-Num availability
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread