Subject: [Isis-wg] ES/IS options in an LSP

From: "Sivakumar A" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 16:54:52 +0530

Hi all,

In an LSP why should all Intermediate System Neighbour options always precede the End System Neighbour options.(As per the ISO/IEC 10589:1992(E) Section 9.8 page No. 55.

Thanks and regards

Sivakumar A
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from Indiatimes at  http://email.indiatimes.com

---

From: mike shand <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 10:00:28 +0100

At 16:54 24/05/2001 +0530, Sivakumar A wrote:

>Hi all,
>
>In an LSP why should all Intermediate System Neighbour options always 
>precede the End System Neighbour options.(As per the ISO/IEC 10589:1992(E) 
>Section 9.8 page No. 55.

Didn't we just discuss this? Its an attempt to avoid having to move options 
from one LSP to another. So the idea was to keep the (more stable) IS 
information together and leave the ES information to flap around at the end.

Some implementations put the IS information in LSPs starting at zero and 
working up, and ES information starting at 255 and working down.

It doesn't really buy you all that much. See also 7.3.4.4

         Mike

>Thanks and regards
>
>Sivakumar A
>
>----------
>Get Your Private, Free E-mail from Indiatimes at 
><http://email.indiatimes.com>http://email.indiatimes.com

_______________________________________________
Isis-wg mailing list  -  [email-masked]
http://external.juniper.net/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg