The MPLS WG Archive

[Dave Katz <dkatz@juniper.net>]

At one point in the life of the draft it allowed putting multiple chunks
of stuff into a single LSA, but John Moy was fairly adamant that LSAs
have the finest granularity possible, so that's what we ended up with.

   Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 20:20:36 -0800 (PST)
   From: Kireeti Kompella <kireeti@juniper.net>
   Cc: dkatz@juniper.net, kireeti@juniper.net, mpls@UU.NET, swallow@cisco.com,
	   tli@procket.com

   > I am not from OSPF land :) and I don't have the latest version of the
   > OSPF TE Extensions draft handy but I recall a statement in the draft
   > indicating that each sub-TLV of the Link TLV may occur only once.

   As you say, lifting this restriction is the easy way out, and makes
   OSPF compatible with ISIS.  Forthcoming.

   > In addition, the OSPF TE Extensions draft states that only a single Link
   > TLV may occur in an Opaque LSA of Type 10 implying multiple Opaque LSAs
   > for multiple Link TLVs. This again has a potential for a negative impact
   > to OSPF operation in particular flooding. The question therefore is
   > whether this restriction can also be lifted, i.e. Opaque LSA may carry
   > more than one Link TLV.

   This is actually a Good Thing.  Why would this affect flooding negatively?
   It would appear useful to decouple the flooding of independent TE links.

   Kireeti.