The MPLS-OPS Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS-OPS Archive>month:2001-Mar> msg00122



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]  
  [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index]

RE: loopback /32 mask

  • From: "Raymond Cheung" <rcheung@slb.com>
  • Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 13:59:21 -0600
  • Importance: Normal
  • Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 16:16:43 -0500
  • To: "MPLS Mailing List" <mpls-ops@mplsrc.com>

I also changed the mask to /30, and the tunnel is still set up. I also
enable "ip ospf network point-to-point" under this loopback since OSPF
advertises only host route for loopbacks no matter what mask is. I also
rebooted the router, and the tunnel is still up. From the other P routers,
/30 prefix did show up instead of /32. Then I changed the TE path from
explicit path to dynamic path, the tunnel is torn down and then set up
without any problems.
I just don't understand why the /32 mask should be mandatory from some Cisco
presentation. It looks like other masks work too.

-----Original Message-----
From: Raymond Cheung [mailto:rcheung@slb.com]
Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2001 4:56 PM
To: MPLS Mailing List
Subject: loopback /32 mask


Any particular reason for loopback to be /32 mask during RSVP-TE config? I
understand it's good to have loopback as router id or headend, or ..., but
my question is, is it mandatory that the mask should be /32? why other masks
won't work?
regards,

================================================
Yinglam (Raymond) Cheung
Schlumberger Network Solutions
CCIE (R/S), CCNP+ATM, CCDP
Tel: (713) 513-3285
5599 San Felipe St Suite 400
Houston, TX 77056
Email: rcheung@slb.com
================================================

-------
The MPLS-OPS Mailing List
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:  http://www.mplsrc.com/mplsops.shtml
Archive: http://www.mplsrc.com/mpls-ops_archive.shtml

-------
The MPLS-OPS Mailing List
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:  http://www.mplsrc.com/mplsops.shtml
Archive: http://www.mplsrc.com/mpls-ops_archive.shtml