Re: Repost: RFC 3471: IF ID specification WRT component link.

[Anca Zamfir <ancaz@cisco.com>]

Yakov,
At 07:37 AM 3/10/2003 -0800, Yakov Rekhter wrote:
> Anca,
>
> > Yakov,
> > What goes in the IF-ID RSVP_HOP TLVs if upstream and downstream directions
> > use different numbered component links?
>
> draft-ietf-mpls-bundle-04.txt does *not* support this.
It looks like draft-ietf-mpls-bundle-04.txt does not support different 
links (numbered or unnumbered) for the upstream and downstream directions.
On the other hand, RFC3471 seems to allow different unnumbered links for 
the upstream and downstream LSP directions, but no equivalent support for 
the numbered case, so it looks like a small inconsistency. Any reasons for 
this?

Thanks,
Anca


> Yakov.
>
> > Thanks,
> > Anca
> >
> > At 06:58 AM 3/10/2003 -0800, Yakov Rekhter wrote:
> > >Sameer,
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Reposting, as I did not get any response.  Could
> > > > someone please answer the question.
> > >
> > >from  draft-ietf-mpls-bundle-04.txt:
> > >
> > >    If the component link is numbered, the IF_ID RSVP_HOP object, or
> > >    IF_ID TLV carries either Type 1 (IPv4 address) or Type 2 (IPv6
> > >    address) TLVs (see [GMPLS-SIG]). The address carried in the TLV
> > >    identifies the link for which label allocation must be done.
> > >
> > >    If the component link is unnumbered, the IF_ID RSVP_HOP object, or
> > >    IF_ID TLV carries Type 3 (IF_INDEX) TLV (see [GMPLS-SIG]). The
> > >    value carried in Type 3 TLV contains the identifier of the selected
> > >    component link assigned to the link by the sender of the Path/REQUEST
> > >    message. Processing this object is the same as specified in Section
> > >    "Processing the IF_ID RSVP_HOP object"/"Processing the IF_ID TLV"
> > >    of [RSVP-UNNUM]/[CRLDP-UNNUM].
> > >
> > >Yakov.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > > - Sameer
> > > >
> > > > --- Sameer K <sameerdw@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > Hello All,
> > > > >
> > > > > From the RFC 3471 - GMPLS Signaling Functional
> > > > > Description, Section 9.1.1, it appears that there is
> > > > > no way for upstream node, to specify component links
> > > > > that are numbered, in the IF-ID HOP object.
> > > > >
> > > > > The TLV format for IF-ID Types 4 and 5 assumes that
> > > > > the component link is always un-numbered.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is this the way it was planned to be?.  If yes, then
> > > > > what should IF-ID look like for numbered component
> > > > > link (which is a valid scenario per the Link
> > > > > Bundling
> > > > > draft).
> > > > >
> > > > > Or did I get it all wrong?
> > > > > TIA
> > > > > - Sameer
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > __________________________________________________
> > > > > Do you Yahoo!?
> > > > > Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
> > > > > http://taxes.yahoo.com/
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > __________________________________________________
> > > > Do you Yahoo!?
> > > > Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
> > > > http://taxes.yahoo.com/
> > > >
> >
> > --------------------------------------------
> > Anca Zamfir                                Public Carrier IP
> > Cisco Systems, Inc.                    email: ancaz@cisco.com
> > 2000 Innovation Dr., Kanata          tel#: (613) 254-3484
> > Ontario, CANADA  K2K 3E8         fax:  (613) 254-3717
> >
> >
> >
--------------------------------------------
Anca Zamfir                                Public Carrier IP
Cisco Systems, Inc.                    email: ancaz@cisco.com
2000 Innovation Dr., Kanata          tel#: (613) 254-3484
Ontario, CANADA  K2K 3E8         fax:  (613) 254-3717