RE: IGP Extensions - CCAMP Milestones

["LE ROUX Jean-Louis RD-CORE-LAN" <jeanlouis.leroux@francetelecom.com>]

Hi Dimitri,

Thanks for the comment.

As just explained by JP, the TE Node Cap TLV carries topology related parameters used as constraints in path computation. The leaking of such info across areas sounds useless as LSR TE visibility is limited to one area anyway... 
But this is, of course, open to discussions. By the way, do you have any application in mind where such leaking would be useful?

Regards,

JL






> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : JP Vasseur [mailto:jvasseur@cisco.com] 
> Envoyé : jeudi 17 novembre 2005 16:58
> À : Dimitri Papadimitriou; Dimitri Papadimitriou
> Cc : zzx-adrian@olddog.co.uk; ccamp@ops.ietf.org; LE ROUX 
> Jean-Louis RD-CORE-LAN
> Objet : Re: IGP Extensions - CCAMP Milestones
> 
> Hi dimitri,
> 
> On Nov 16, 2005, at 6:30 PM, dimitri papadimitriou wrote:
> 
> > adrian,
> >
> > could you explain the reasoning for having a TE specific TLV in the 
> > auto-mesh document with area and AS-wide flooding scope 
> while the TE 
> > router cap TLV is restricted to an area flooding scope ?
> > shouldn't be one way or the other i.e. either restrict all TE info 
> > area-local or allow for TE router cap TLV with AS-wide 
> flooding scope 
> > ?
> >
> > note: there is nothing in the TE router cap TLV that would impact 
> > scaling more than the TE auto-mesh TLV does
> >
> 
> I guess that the reason for allowing both intra and inter-area  
> flooding scopes for automesh is obvious (we need to have TE LSP mesh  
> within areas and spanning multiple areas).
> 
> So your question is probably why don't we allow the TE router 
> cap TLV  
> to be flooded across the domain ? As far as I can remember JL 
> already  
> answered this question ... JL, could you forward your email again ?
> 
> In the meantime, I can answer it: the reason is that such TE node  
> capabilities are used for TE LSP computation which cannot take into  
> account nodes that do not reside in the node's area.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> JP.
> 
> > thanks,
> > - dimitri.
> >
> > Adrian Farrel wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Hi,
> >> We have two immediate milestones to address:
> >> Oct 05  First version WG I-D for Advertising TE Node Capabilities  
> >> in ISIS
> >> and OSPF
> >> Oct 05  First version WG I-D for Automatic discovery of 
> MPLS-TE mesh
> >> membership
> >> There are two personal submissions which address these topics:
> >> draft-vasseur-ccamp-te-node-cap-01.txt
> >> draft-vasseur-ccamp-automesh-02.txt
> >> I propose that we move these into the WG and then kick the tires
> >> thoroughly.
> >> Opinions please.
> >> Thanks,
> >> Adrian
> >> .
> >
>