The MPLS WG Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS WG Archive>month:2006-Sep> msg00082



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]  
  [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index]

[mpls] mplsTunnelInstance in MPLS TE MIB

  • From: "Thomas D. Nadeau" <tnadeau@cisco.com>
  • Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 15:56:30 -0400
  • Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-2.cisco.com; header.From=tnadeau@cisco.com;dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com verified; );
  • Cc: mpls@ietf.org
  • DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; l=1518; t=1159300578; x=1160164578;c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim2001;h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version;d=cisco.com; i=tnadeau@cisco.com;z=From:=22Thomas=20D.=20Nadeau=22=20<tnadeau@cisco.com>|Subject:Re=3A=20[mpls]=20mplsTunnelInstance=20in=20MPLS=20TE=20MIB|To:Daniel=20Chuang=20<dchuang@juniper.net>;X=v=3Dcisco.com=3B=20h=3DFzCBMkIs3BXWjOktg9gTGWruFDY=3D;b=ZG2bwTeZGRPfKq41We9dwzno5ACnquVJgRNMRXBOKifsEsRH4bQZOshRCtoJKAQTVRz3ktg5zEwb4zPBCJLul31Lp+SvIBDlMzj66gJHpgCEMWrAUCJ5KVI2tImXigw3;
  • X-IronPort-AV: i="4.09,221,1157353200"; d="scan'208"; a="43739663:sNHT32678260"
  • X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Sep 2006 19:56:17.0694 (UTC)FILETIME=[D4752BE0:01C6E1A5]


	I am glad that you guys are finally getting
around to implementing the MPLS-TE-MIB. *)

	To answer your question, the use of SHOULD
in the text is there to denote that "most of the time"
this is the recommended usage. In practice, we also
made this recommendation based on how the implementations
at the time chose the contents of that value. The idea
is that the indexes are most useful when they correlate
as closely as possible to the signaled values. Also,
the SHOULD here denotes the fact that the exceptional
case of mplsTunnelInstance=0 denotes a tunnel head,
and thus in this case does not correlate to any Sender
Template object.

	--Tom



> Hi,
>
>   In the rfc3812(TE)/rfc3811(TC) mib, mplsTunnelInstance definition  
> mentions:
>
> When the MPLS signaling protocol is
> rsvp(2) this value SHOULD be equal to the LSP Id
> of the Sender Template object.
>
> This is 'SHOULD',  but  based on rfc2119 definition:
>
> 3. SHOULD   This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that there
>   may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a
>   particular item, but the full implications must be understood and
>   carefully weighed before choosing a different course.
>
> What is the valid reason for not being 'MUST' then any internal/other
> value can be used as vendors see fit ?
>
> thanks,
> Daniel
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@lists.ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls

_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls