hi jean-philippe JP Vasseur wrote:
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 doesI 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 ?
would you also send the reply i provided in case
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.
i am not sure to understand why the path computation domain has to be limited on a 1:1 basis to a single routing domain
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 ISISand 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 ..