Subject: [Isis-wg] TE Router ID in draft-ietf-isis-ipv6-te-00.txt

From: "Adrian Farrel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 12:38:49 -0000

Hi,

It has been brought to my attention that this draft includes some
ambiguous text...

3.2.1  TE Router ID TLV

   The TE Router ID TLV is a stable IPv4 address that is routable,
   regardless of the state of each interface.

   Similarly, for IPv6, it is useful to have a stable IPv6 address
   identifying a TE node.  The IPv6 TE Router ID TLV is defined in
   section 4.1.

I assume that the intention of this text is not to change the definition
of "TE Router ID" from a 32 bit value, but rather to introduce a new
concept, the "IPv6 TE Router ID" that is 128 bits.

Is this correct? If so, I assume that the principal uses for this value
are:
1. To allow the identification of a router in the path of a TE tunnel
using an IPv6 address. In particular to allow MPLS-TE LSPs to be signalled
using a node address rather than interface addresses.
2. To allow the use of an IPv6 control plane distinct from the addressing
scheme used in the data plane. In particular to allow signaling messages
for GMPLS data switches to be routed to the appropriate protocol
controllers using IPv6.

It is worth noting that certain concepts, such as unnumbered links do not
currently support the use of 128 bit identifiers for routers in the
principle TE signaling protocol, RSVP-TE (see RFC3477).

If the intention of the ISIS WG is to extend the use of TE Router ID into
the context of RFC3477, then it would be worth raising this with the MPLS
and CCAMP WGs.

Cheers,
Adrian

PS.
   The TE Router ID TLV is a stable IPv4 address that is routable,
   regardless of the state of each interface.
No it isn't. It *contains* an address.

_______________________________________________
Isis-wg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg

---

From: "Jonathan Harrison" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 17:37:07 -0000

Adrian,

You are correct.  The IPv6 TE Router ID is not intended to change the definition of the TE Router ID, and may be used as per your description.  

This definition of the IPv6 TE Router ID does not necessarily require an extension of RFC 3477.   However, I believe that in an IPv6 only network it would be useful to allow the identification of an unnumbered link using an IPv6 TE router ID together with an interface ID.  This is something we are planning to bring up with the MPLS/CCAMP WGs.  

Thanks for the comments,
Jon
(P.S. Thanks also for pointing out the "is"/"contains" bug - I'll fix that in the next revision.) 

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On
Behalf Of Adrian Farrel
Posted At: 28 January 2005 12:39
Posted To: ISIS WG
Conversation: [Isis-wg] TE Router ID in draft-ietf-isis-ipv6-te-00.txt
Subject: [Isis-wg] TE Router ID in draft-ietf-isis-ipv6-te-00.txt

Hi,

3.2.1  TE Router ID TLV

Cheers,
Adrian

PS.