Subject: RE: [Isis-wg] isisLSPTable

From: "Ganguly, Shamik" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2002 12:17:49 -0400

> 3. Draft10 does not seem to have something to regulate 
> leaking of routes to L2 from L1. We can either
> add a new field to isisRedistributeTable to differentiate 
> between the two or create a separate table.
> 
> -Shamik
 
Shamik -
	We have isisSysL2toL1Leaking and 
isisRedistributeAddrTable.  What else do we need?

- jeff parker

-- The Redistribution table defines addresses that should be leaked from
-- L2 to L1 if isisSysL2toL1Leaking is enabled.

    isisRedistributeAddrTable OBJECT-TYPE
        SYNTAX SEQUENCE OF IsisRedistributeAddrEntry
        MAX-ACCESS not-accessible
        STATUS current
        DESCRIPTION
            "This table provides criteria to decide if a route should
             be leaked from L2 to L1 when Domain Wide Prefix leaking is
             enabled.

             Addresses that match the summary mask in the table will
             be announced at L1 by routers when isisSysL2toL1Leaking
             is enabled.  Routes that fall into the ranges specified
             are are announced as is, without being summarized."
    
<Shamik> I am talking of routes leaking from L1 to L2. Our implementation
can configure prefixes/mask pairs that are not leaked to L2 from L1. My
suggestion was to handle both of the scenarios, L1->L2 and L2->L1 from the
same redistribute table, we just need to add an extra field to differentiate
between the two.
_______________________________________________
Isis-wg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg