Hello,

Section 2.4.2 in edition 05:

"The Link Type and Link ID sub-TLVs are mandatory.... All other sub-TLVs
defined here may occur at most once."

Out of this I concluded that sub-tlv 3-9 are optionally present.

Regards,
Bart

Curtis Call wrote:

> See section 2.4.2:
>
> Each sub-TLV may occur only once. Unrecognized types are ignored.
> All of the defined sub-TLVs are mandatory (though future sub-TLVs may
> not necessarily be mandatory.)
>
> So you should never encounter the situation you described. (A TE LSA minus
> the metric sub-TLV).

>
>
> Bart Batsleer <bart.batsleerALCATEL.BE> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > I have 2 questions on the draft-katz-yeung-ospf-traffic-05
> >
> > 1) In case the traffic engineering metric sub-tlv is not present in the
> link
> > tlv, does the traffic engineering SPF calculation have to rely on the
> > standard OSPF link metric ?
> >
> > 2) The behaviour is stated in the corresponding isis draft, is there a
> > reason why this is not stated in the OSPF draft ?
> >
> > Thanks in advance,
> > Bart

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]