Subject: RE: Last call on LSP Ping

From: Shahram Davari <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 09:15:15 -0800

RFC 3330 says:

   127.0.0.0/8 - This block is assigned for use as the Internet host
   loopback address.  A datagram sent by a higher level protocol to an
   address anywhere within this block should loop back inside the host.
   This is ordinarily implemented using only 127.0.0.1/32 for loopback,
   but no addresses within this block should ever appear on any network
   anywhere [RFC1700, page 5].

And RFC1700 says:

   g)   {127, <any>}

         Internal host loopback address.  Should never appear outside
         a host.

Doesn't this draft violate these RFCs?

-Shahram

---

From: Curtis Villamizar <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 13:19:57 -0500

In message <[email-masked]
>, Shahram Davari writes:

No.  It is exactly what RFC1700 specifies.  127.0.0.1/32 is not
routable, just avaiable locally.

Curtis

---

From: George Swallow <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 12:22:44 -0500

> Doesn't this draft violate these RFCs?

This it falls within the intent.  If the label stack gets completely
poped off you don't want it to go any further.  That's the whole point
of using that address range.  I really don't see a need to find a new
range.

(Note that I'm counting the implicit null as still being a label stack
- so the packet gets as far as the stack will take it and no further.)

...George

==================================================================
George Swallow       Cisco Systems                  (978) 497-8143
                     250 Apollo Drive
                     Chelmsford, Ma 01824