IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Isis-wg] Confusion in RFC statement

Sumanta Seal <seal_sum@yahoo.co.in> Mon, 15 September 2008 10:18 UTC

Return-Path: <isis-wg-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: isis-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-isis-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8853F3A6935; Mon, 15 Sep 2008 03:18:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: isis-wg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: isis-wg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90F293A6935 for <isis-wg@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Sep 2008 03:18:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.091
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.091 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.093, BAYES_40=-0.185, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0F2HHLgzO+8M for <isis-wg@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Sep 2008 03:18:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from web8503.mail.in.yahoo.com (web8503.mail.in.yahoo.com [202.43.219.165]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id CE4733A6873 for <isis-wg@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Sep 2008 03:18:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 74267 invoked by uid 60001); 15 Sep 2008 10:18:41 -0000
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.co.in; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Message-ID; b=6oniu4exlq3Ac0mbRuKEnAx/WLKRktUNWTZSS054nyyqu3qx4qSENmIrg0N/qBWAwwLU3nyh7FlsS8HMr9D6K2v1I9D4PEmkcDJb29auuiFvgy8ra/q3afxBcbkLzf2P0b2qoSXBwXE3+nqK3cijpYT5YmqyxvnLSHzxafM1WeQ=;
X-YMail-OSG: BP.xRp4VM1kqdgqYHvCmj3etfIpGdcJaF5ujIN_5pqiI8XFcWcZaT8pnmZKqM0g8WPBSA5R4kpbrARJU4DbROxcJTWquYU80mD97hQ_NTb2XU.MJn2rPk177Re4RXTZFWNhF.scOkQ5EgNhajdwMW6Ja
Received: from [203.197.124.190] by web8503.mail.in.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 15 Sep 2008 15:48:40 IST
X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.7.218.2
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 15:48:40 +0530 (IST)
From: Sumanta Seal <seal_sum@yahoo.co.in>
To: isis-wg@ietf.org, tony.li@tony.li
In-Reply-To: <FED2D56750394436AE1D71E7B0726DA9@ad.redback.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <197588.74189.qm@web8503.mail.in.yahoo.com>
Cc: hhwsmit@xs4all.nl
Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] Confusion in RFC statement
X-BeenThere: isis-wg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: seal_sum@yahoo.co.in
List-Id: IETF IS-IS working group <isis-wg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg>, <mailto:isis-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/isis-wg>
List-Post: <mailto:isis-wg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:isis-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg>, <mailto:isis-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1855000349=="
Sender: isis-wg-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: isis-wg-bounces@ietf.org

Hi Tony,

Thanks a lot for making this clear.

Regards,
Sumanta


--- On Fri, 12/9/08, Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li> wrote:
From: Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li>
Subject: RE: Confusion in RFC statement
To: seal_sum@yahoo.co.in, isis-wg@ietf.org
Cc: hhwsmit@xs4all.nl
Date: Friday, 12 September, 2008, 10:38 PM



 
 
Hi 
Sumanta,
 
A prefix is 
'injected' into IS-IS when a router inserts the prefix into it's own LSPs, 
thereby advertising reachability to that prefix.
 
Yes, normally 
this is achieved by configuration of a prefix as a reachable address, either by 
running IS-IS on a particular interface, redistributing routes into IS-IS, 
configuring summary routes, or possibly through other means.  The exact 
configuration steps or automatic mechanisms for injecting routes into IS-IS is, 
of course, highly implementation dependent.
 
Regards,
Tony
 


  
  
  From: Sumanta Seal 
  [mailto:seal_sum@yahoo.co.in] 
Sent: Friday, September 12, 2008 3:16 
  AM
To: isis-wg@ietf.org
Cc: hhwsmit@xs4all.nl; 
  tony.li@tony.li
Subject: Confusion in RFC 
  statement


  
  
    
    
      Hello all,

I am having  some confusion in a 
        statement in RFC 3784 (IS-IS extension for Traffic 
        Engineering). In section 4.1 (The up/down bit, page 8) of the 
        RFC, there is one statement as "The up/down bit SHALL be set to 0 when a 
        prefix is first injected into IS-IS". In this statement, the meaning of 
        injection of a prefix into IS-IS 
        is not clear to me.

How can I inject a prefix into IS-IS ? Does 
        this means configuration of a prefix as reachable address in IS-IS 
        router (by configuration of summary address in the IS-IS router) or 
        something else.

Please help me out regarding this 
        issue.

Thanks,
Sumanta


  
  Unlimited freedom, unlimited storage. Get 
  it now


      Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to http://in.messenger.yahoo.com/invite/
_______________________________________________
Isis-wg mailing list
Isis-wg@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email