The MPLS WG Archive

[Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@cisco.com>]

        Most if not all MPLS implementations that I know of only require the operator
to configure the tunnel at the head end.
 
But, if you want to treat a tunnel as a real interface (and assign IP addresses etc. to it at both ends)

        

I would
categorize the use of a single interface as a "real"
interface
configuration as well.

> you
> will have to have interface configuration at both the head and tail ends.

        

That is
possible using the existing MIB. I think that we have
violent agreement on this point.

If you don't have a tail end interface configuration the only reason to use tunnel interfaces is probably to make the tunnel *look* like an interface on the head end router. This however means that you are treating it as an interface on one side and treating it as a simple terminating tunnel on the other side. This seems anomalous.   

        

I guess
that you are entitled to your opinion. My customers
don't think that this approach is so anomalous.

>  If your implementation
> wishes to create an
> interface for the tail end of the tunnel, it can do this based on the
> acceptance of
> an RSVP-TE session at the tail point, or via manual configuration.
> However, making 
> this ifIndex consistent with the one at the head automatically is
> something that I think you 
> will have to do
> manually.
>  
> I think you
> misunderstood, the actual value of the ifIndex is of no consequence,
> you just have to have a corresponding interface at the other
> end.

        

Okay, so
what is the problem then? 8)

        

--Tom

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.