Subject: Re: ospf te doc

From: "Dovolsky, Dan" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 09:45:57 -0400

Hi Kireeti,

Having Instance field 24 bits is 100% fine to me. (That's the way our OSPF is treat it).

BTW, 16 bits Instance field it's not so large as it seems.

Let's take as an example application, where multiple TE resources advertised per each TE Link. Suppose, some new TE Resource LSA is used for this purpose. Then, it's much more easy to application to manage sepate TE Resource LSA instance indexes per TE Link rather keep one global TE LSA instance indexing. At least, it allows fast database lookup operation.
In this case 16 bits allows to only have very limited instance number of such a resource TE LSAs per TE Link.

Dan.

-----Original Message-----
From: Kireeti Kompella [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 7:24 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: ospf te doc

Hi Dan,

On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, Dovolsky, Dan wrote:

> I think, the Reserved field should not be checked at all on receive. All 32 bits of LSA ID should be treated as LSA ID. This allows more flexibility for backward compatibility for future reuse of Reserve field.

Will making the Instance field 24 bits (i.e., the full Opaque ID) work
for you?

Kireeti.