IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: minutes of RIPv2 meeting in Amsterdam

"Karl L. Swartz" <kls@unixhub.slac.stanford.edu> Wed, 04 August 1993 05:05 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa24546; 4 Aug 93 1:05 EDT
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa24539; 4 Aug 93 1:05 EDT
Received: from atlas.xylogics.com by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa29539; 4 Aug 93 1:05 EDT
Received: by atlas.xylogics.com id AA09143 (5.65c/UK-2.1-930726); Wed, 4 Aug 1993 01:06:48 -0400
Received: from SERV02.SLAC.Stanford.EDU by atlas.xylogics.com with SMTP id AA14127 (5.65c/UK-2.1-930726); Wed, 4 Aug 1993 01:06:30 -0400
Received: from unixhub.SLAC.Stanford.EDU by SERV02.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU (PMDF #2896 ) id <01H1BOLOZ6W0000X8I@SERV02.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>; Tue, 3 Aug 1993 22:03:13 PDT
Received: by unixhub.SLAC.Stanford.EDU (4.1/SLAC 920508) from argus.SLAC.Stanford.EDU id AA05044; Tue, 3 Aug 93 22:03:04 PDT
Date: 03 Aug 1993 22:03:03 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: "Karl L. Swartz" <kls@unixhub.slac.stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: minutes of RIPv2 meeting in Amsterdam
In-Reply-To: <9308032309.AA05646@saffron.acc.com>; from "Fred Baker" at Aug 3, 93 4:09 pm
To: Fred Baker <fbaker@acc.com>
Cc: gmalkin@xylogics.com, jch@nr-tech.cit.cornell.edu, ietf-rip@xylogics.com
Message-Id: <9308040503.AA05044@unixhub.SLAC.Stanford.EDU>
X-Envelope-To: gmalkin@xylogics.com, ietf-rip@xylogics.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]

> It is true that 0.0.0.ifIndex is not an IP address; it is precisely this
> fact that makes it distinguishable from a numbered link's address. The
> point is to have a way to identify the entry associated with the interface
> (which is supplied by the IP Address in the other case).
> 
> This is only minorly different from what is done in the OSPF MIB, which you
> had proposed that we emulate. The "IP Address" in that case is always
> 0.0.0.0, and a fifth integer contains the ifIndex value for the interface.

If it's only minorly different, why no go all the way and make it not
different at all.  Then it's consistent with the OSPF MIB, and also
seems to be a bit less of a hack than using 0.0.0.ifIndex.

--
Karl Swartz		|INet	kls@unixhub.slac.stanford.edu
SLAC Computing Services	|	   or kls@ditka.chicago.com
1-415/926-3630		|UUCP	uunet!lll-winken!unixhub!kls  -or-  ditka!kls
(SLAC and the US Dept. of Energy don't necessarily agree with my opinions.)

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email