Subject: OSPF for MPLambdaS: Extensions

From: "Frank Hujber" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 17:08:53 -0500

Folks,

I apologize if this question has been previously asked and answered...

In  "...kompella-ospf-ompls-extensions..." there are additions made to
"...katz-yeung-ospf-traffic..." yet the notion of identifying a port on an
OXC with an IP address was left intact.

What is the motivation for this?

Is there a choice that is compliant?

Frank Hujber
[email-masked]

---

From: Kireeti Kompella <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 17:22:23 -0800 (PST)

Hi,

> What is the motivation for this?

First of all, OSPF is an IP protocol.  It seems logical to identify
things with IP addresses.  Second, what you say is not completely
true: there is an alternative, to identify ports with "interface
indices" -- simple 16-bit numbers, to be extended to 32-bit numbers
in a future version.  Third, this comes back to the question of using
IP-based protocols for the control of OXCs, etc. -- it is perfectly
feasible to use, say PNNI with PNNI-style addresses for this purpose,
but the IETF is probably not the ideal venue for such protocol
development.

What type of addresses would you suggest?

> Is there a choice that is compliant?

Compliant with what?

Kireeti.