Subject: RE: [Isis-wg] isisLSPTable

From: Jeff Parker <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2002 12:23:36 -0400

> > > 3. Draft10 does not seem to have something to
> > > regulate leaking of routes to L2 from L1.  
>  
> > Shamik -
> > 	We have isisSysL2toL1Leaking and 
> > isisRedistributeAddrTable.  What else do we need?
> 
> I am talking of routes leaking from L1 to L2. 

Sorry for my confusion.

> Our implementation can configure prefixes/mask 
> pairs that are not leaked to L2 from L1. My
> suggestion was to handle both of the scenarios, 
> L1->L2 and L2->L1 from the same redistribute table, 
> we just need to add an extra field to differentiate
> between the two.

We have the Summary Table to deal with L1 to L2 leaking.  
I can add some text to point out that this is it's
function, but it is described in RFC 1195.  

The functions of the two tables are different, 
as we summarize going up, but not going down.

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