Internet-Drafts | 1 Dec 21:50 2005
Picon

I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-isis-caps-04.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the IS-IS for IP Internets Working Group of the IETF.

	Title		: IS-IS extensions for advertising router information
	Author(s)	: J. Vasseur, et al.
	Filename	: draft-ietf-isis-caps-04.txt
	Pages		: 8
	Date		: 2005-12-1
	
This document defines a new optional IS-IS TLV named CAPABILITY, 
   formed of multiple sub-TLVs, which allows a router to announce its 
   capabilities within an IS-IS level or the entire routing domain.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-isis-caps-04.txt

To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to 
i-d-announce-request <at> ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message.  
You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce 
to change your subscription settings.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username
"anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in,
type "cd internet-drafts" and then
	"get draft-ietf-isis-caps-04.txt".

A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html 
or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt

(Continue reading)

Hannes Gredler | 2 Dec 08:10 2005
Picon

Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-isis-caps-04.txt

would'nt it make sense to make the router-id field
variable length (i.e. prepend it with a 1-octet router-id-length)
field to have a catch-all TLV for V6 as well ?

/hannes

Internet-Drafts <at> ietf.org wrote:
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
> This draft is a work item of the IS-IS for IP Internets Working Group of the IETF.
> 
> 	Title		: IS-IS extensions for advertising router information
> 	Author(s)	: J. Vasseur, et al.
> 	Filename	: draft-ietf-isis-caps-04.txt
> 	Pages		: 8
> 	Date		: 2005-12-1
> 	
> This document defines a new optional IS-IS TLV named CAPABILITY, 
>    formed of multiple sub-TLVs, which allows a router to announce its 
>    capabilities within an IS-IS level or the entire routing domain.
> 
> A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-isis-caps-04.txt
> 
> To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to 
> i-d-announce-request <at> ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message.  
> You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce 
> to change your subscription settings.
> 
> 
> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username
(Continue reading)

Santoshkumar H D | 2 Dec 11:04 2005
Picon

Query regarding ISIS area-authentication.

 Hey all , 

 I have two routers connected say A & B, where in, 
 on one router simple authentication is configured(A)
 and no Authentication configured on anther router(B).
 In this scenario, whether each router should accept
lsp
 from one-anther or not?? 

 Thanks in Advance,
 Santosh.

		
__________________________________________ 
Yahoo! DSL – Something to write home about. 
Just $16.99/mo. or less. 
dsl.yahoo.com 
Tony Li | 2 Dec 12:13 2005
Picon

Re: Query regarding ISIS area-authentication.


On Dec 2, 2005, at 2:04 AM, Santoshkumar H D wrote:

>  Hey all ,
>
>  I have two routers connected say A & B, where in,
>  on one router simple authentication is configured(A)
>  and no Authentication configured on anther router(B).
>  In this scenario, whether each router should accept
> lsp
>  from one-anther or not??

B should accept A's LSP, but not vice versa.

Note that some implementations have a special knob that
will explicitly cause A to accept B's LSP anyway.  This is
a deployment aid to avoid flash cutovers.

Tony
Naiming Shen | 3 Dec 00:55 2005
Picon

Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-isis-caps-04.txt

Hannes,

Hannes Gredler said the following on 12/01/2005 11:10 PM:
> would'nt it make sense to make the router-id field
> variable length (i.e. prepend it with a 1-octet router-id-length)
> field to have a catch-all TLV for V6 as well ?
> 

My take on this is that, the router-id is just a 32bits number not
necessarilly associated with a particular address family to
simplify the operation. If there is any routing operation using
this capability feature, then it knows which system(with system-ID)
announces this capability-tlv thus an association can be made this
way.

thanks.
- Naiming

> /hannes
> 
> Internet-Drafts <at> ietf.org wrote:
> 
>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts 
>> directories.
>> This draft is a work item of the IS-IS for IP Internets Working Group 
>> of the IETF.
>>
>>     Title        : IS-IS extensions for advertising router information
>>     Author(s)    : J. Vasseur, et al.
>>     Filename    : draft-ietf-isis-caps-04.txt
(Continue reading)

Santoshkumar H D | 2 Dec 10:38 2005
Picon

Query regarding ISIS area-authentication.

  Hey all , 

  I have two routers connected say A & B, where in, 
  on one router simple authentication is configured
(A)
  and no Authentication configured on anther router
(B).
  In this scenario, whether each router should accept
lsp
  from one-anther or not?? 

  Thanks in Advance,
  Santosh.

		
__________________________________________ 
Yahoo! DSL – Something to write home about. 
Just $16.99/mo. or less. 
dsl.yahoo.com 
Hannes Gredler | 5 Dec 08:50 2005
Picon

Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-isis-caps-04.txt


Naiming Shen wrote:
> Hannes,
> 
> Hannes Gredler said the following on 12/01/2005 11:10 PM:
> 
>> would'nt it make sense to make the router-id field
>> variable length (i.e. prepend it with a 1-octet router-id-length)
>> field to have a catch-all TLV for V6 as well ?
>>
> 
> My take on this is that, the router-id is just a 32bits number not
> necessarilly associated with a particular address family to
> simplify the operation. If there is any routing operation using
> this capability feature, then it knows which system(with system-ID)
> announces this capability-tlv thus an association can be made this
> way.

naiming,

i believe association with systemID is not possible once you flood across
level boundaries (S/D bit set) - therfore you need a "connector" to point
back to the originator. (which i guess is the intention of including the
router-id).

he case that i am thinking about is "what if this originator lives
in an L1 V6-only island ?" and the L1L2 needs to generate the router-id field
based on TE-ID input and teh only information it can find is a V6 TE ID ?

/hannes
(Continue reading)

Naiming Shen | 5 Dec 09:26 2005
Picon

Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-isis-caps-04.txt

Hannes,

Hannes Gredler said the following on 12/04/2005 11:50 PM:
> 
> 
> Naiming Shen wrote:
> 
>> Hannes,
>>
>> Hannes Gredler said the following on 12/01/2005 11:10 PM:
>>
>>> would'nt it make sense to make the router-id field
>>> variable length (i.e. prepend it with a 1-octet router-id-length)
>>> field to have a catch-all TLV for V6 as well ?
>>>
>>
>> My take on this is that, the router-id is just a 32bits number not
>> necessarilly associated with a particular address family to
>> simplify the operation. If there is any routing operation using
>> this capability feature, then it knows which system(with system-ID)
>> announces this capability-tlv thus an association can be made this
>> way.
> 
> 
> naiming,
> 
> i believe association with systemID is not possible once you flood across
> level boundaries (S/D bit set) - therfore you need a "connector" to point
> back to the originator. (which i guess is the intention of including the
> router-id).
(Continue reading)

Hannes Gredler | 5 Dec 09:44 2005
Picon

Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-isis-caps-04.txt


Naiming Shen wrote:
> Hannes,
> 
> Hannes Gredler said the following on 12/04/2005 11:50 PM:
> 
>>
>>
>> Naiming Shen wrote:
>>
>>> Hannes,
>>>
>>> Hannes Gredler said the following on 12/01/2005 11:10 PM:
>>>
>>>> would'nt it make sense to make the router-id field
>>>> variable length (i.e. prepend it with a 1-octet router-id-length)
>>>> field to have a catch-all TLV for V6 as well ?
>>>>
>>>
>>> My take on this is that, the router-id is just a 32bits number not
>>> necessarilly associated with a particular address family to
>>> simplify the operation. If there is any routing operation using
>>> this capability feature, then it knows which system(with system-ID)
>>> announces this capability-tlv thus an association can be made this
>>> way.
>>
>>
>>
>> naiming,
>>
(Continue reading)

Naiming Shen | 5 Dec 10:21 2005
Picon

Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-isis-caps-04.txt

Hannes,

Hannes Gredler said the following on 12/05/2005 12:44 AM:
> 
> 
> Naiming Shen wrote:
> 
>> Hannes,
>>
>> Hannes Gredler said the following on 12/04/2005 11:50 PM:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Naiming Shen wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hannes,
>>>>
>>>> Hannes Gredler said the following on 12/01/2005 11:10 PM:
>>>>
>>>>> would'nt it make sense to make the router-id field
>>>>> variable length (i.e. prepend it with a 1-octet router-id-length)
>>>>> field to have a catch-all TLV for V6 as well ?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> My take on this is that, the router-id is just a 32bits number not
>>>> necessarilly associated with a particular address family to
>>>> simplify the operation. If there is any routing operation using
>>>> this capability feature, then it knows which system(with system-ID)
>>>> announces this capability-tlv thus an association can be made this
>>>> way.
(Continue reading)


Gmane