[Isis-wg] Confusion in RFC statement
Sumanta Seal <seal_sum@yahoo.co.in> Fri, 12 September 2008 10:15 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 237933A6A0A;
Fri, 12 Sep 2008 03:15:59 -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 4E01B3A6A0A
for <isis-wg@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Sep 2008 03:15:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.002
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, 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 ywpiVDfshiM1 for <isis-wg@core3.amsl.com>;
Fri, 12 Sep 2008 03:15:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from web8506.mail.in.yahoo.com (web8506.mail.in.yahoo.com
[202.43.219.168])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id BA97B3A68F1
for <isis-wg@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Sep 2008 03:15:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 6683 invoked by uid 60001); 12 Sep 2008 10:16:03 -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:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Message-ID;
b=4VhWxKpRHyhk1AYuhZ08F/U5iv4Z0Ziy301OATgyE6eOmxqn+l4Fh9ZQY+imga8E3GPwhVfSt+3iLQcgm+geW3OTDkhot7CbyAzjoVb5vkz+7unbD+/ZOGFKktAuM9hx34zKmh64+qCjvn79XMHFkw4BN0LlGZPJETEgvBbKnv8=;
X-YMail-OSG: dGNNBwEVM1kVXfuwenMBTkopHL.fuFqb5l11hrUPN9wv.nl7Vi_77vNGXSOZVf1yKo07Ybp_ouwC_E2rf1IXO3COn4Gi60AbcE.QIO5mM8SPsCK9EnIsmbb0J7ONBiakImhMuvP1haLqPkba37YOi3dO
Received: from [203.197.124.190] by web8506.mail.in.yahoo.com via HTTP;
Fri, 12 Sep 2008 15:46:02 IST
X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.7.218.2
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 15:46:02 +0530 (IST)
From: Sumanta Seal <seal_sum@yahoo.co.in>
To: isis-wg@ietf.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <969086.6290.qm@web8506.mail.in.yahoo.com>
Cc: hhwsmit@xs4all.nl, tony.li@tony.li
Subject: [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="===============1747206371=="
Sender: isis-wg-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: isis-wg-bounces@ietf.org
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
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
- [Isis-wg] Confusion in RFC statement Sumanta Seal
- Re: [Isis-wg] Confusion in RFC statement Tony Li
- Re: [Isis-wg] Confusion in RFC statement Sumanta Seal