The MPLS WG Archive

[Dimitry Haskin <dhaskin@nexabit.com>]

> Dimitry,
> 
> Yes, you're right - 
> it will probably work - but it will defeat the purpose 
> of the extended ID.
> 
No, it will not if used judiciously by cooperating nodes.

> Andi.
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dimitry Haskin [mailto:dhaskin@nexabit.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2000 4:12 PM
> > To: David Charlap; mpls@UU.NET
> > Cc: Abes, Andi
> > Subject: RE: FW: I-D
> > ACTION:draft-ietf-mpls-rsvp-tunnel-applicability-01.t xt
> > 
> > 
> > A small but not insignificant correction.
> > 
> > > > ...
> > > > 1. For LSP's to be belong to the same session they need
> > > >    to share the same egress point and tunnel ID.
> > > >    If the exteneded tunnel ID is set to the Ingress IP 
> > address, only
> > > >    LSP's originating at the same ingress could ever 
> belong to the
> > > >    same session.
> > > 
> > > Yes.
> > > 
> > 
> > There is nothing to prevent nor it is an error for LSPs 
> originating at
> > different ingress nodes to share the same extended tunnel ID 
> > even if this ID
> > happen to be set to an address of one of the ingress nodes.
> > 
> > Dimitry
> > 
>