The MPLS WG Archive

[Guangzhi Li <gli@research.att.com>]

Pras:

Thank you for your response. I asked this question several times. But no body
provides any answer yet. I want to know the answer. Is there any good reason
to design in this format ? Somebody please !!!

-- Guangzhi

Gaitonde Anandprasanna wrote:

> This qeustion was asked by some person earlier but somehow i did not see
> the answers in the mailing lists. If i have missed the answer then please
> provide pointers to mail archives.
>
> I wanted to know why the format of the IPv4 Prefix is that way:
>
>  RSVP ERO subobject IPv4 address:-
>
>  In RSVP-TE, the format of subobject 1: IPv4 address (4.4.1.1) is
>
> 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
>     Type          |         Length       |          IPv4 address
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>         IPv4 address                      |       Prefix Length  |
> Flags
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Can somebody explain to me: What is the advantage to split the IPv4
> address in two words? From the
> implementation point of view, it should be much easy to put IPv4 address
> in a single word.
>
> Thanx in advance
>
> Pras