The MPLS WG Archive

[Khuzema Pithewan <KhuzemaP@netbrahma.com>]

Hi,

It would be great from understanding point of view if it can be answered
more elaborately. 
the question still remains..whats wrong in having IfTable interface entry at
both ends, which can be provisioned from te-mib.
note that..it may not be done manually at tail-end.

Khuzema.

> ----------
> From: 	Thomas Nadeau[SMTP:tnadeau@cisco.com]
> Sent: 	Tuesday, October 30, 2001 5:41 AM
> To: 	Dominic-Savio, Patrick
> Cc: 	'mpls@uu.net'
> Subject: 	RE: Question on tunnel Interface (w.r.t TE MIB)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 	        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. 
>