The MPLS WG Archive

[Nabil Seddigh <nseddigh@tropicnetworks.com>]

Yakov,

>From what you write below, the ERO will be B2,C4,D6.
Is this correct?

Another question: is your proposal precluding an ERO of
A1,B3,C5?

Best,
Nabil Seddigh

> Exactly the same, as if the interfaces would be numbered. That
> is, construct the ERO assuming that all interfaces are numbered.
> Then replace each IP address with a tuple <interface id, Router-ID>.
> 
> Yakov.
> 
>>>> The proposed change is not quite clearly stated. Can you please
>>>> restate in more precise language. Is it possible to put a diagram
>>>> in the draft? E.g if we have nodes A,B,C,D with unnumbered i/f
>>>> 1-6 (I have made them distict for ease of illustration):
>>>>
>>>>       1       2   3          4   5      6
>>>>     A --------- B ------------ C -------- D
>>>>

>>>
>>> Certainly not, as I am proposing that "The Interface ID is 
>>> the interface identifier assigned to the interface by the LSR 
>>> specified by the router ID.
> "
> > >