[rbridge] Final outcome of outer VLANtagsonRBridge-RBridgepackets?
anoop at brocade.com
Tue Oct 23 16:42:16 PDT 2007
It doesn't look like it would be essential at
this point, so if we want to put it in for
faster detection of certain configuration problems
then it should be put in as optional.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dinesh G Dutt [mailto:ddutt at cisco.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 2:11 PM
> To: Anoop Ghanwani
> Cc: Silvano Gai; Radia Perlman; Developing a hybrid router/bridge.
> Subject: RE: [rbridge] Final outcome of outer
> I spoke to David Ward, an IS-IS expert here at Cisco (and a
> co-author on the L2 ISIS draft) and he said that it's
> perfectly fine to use Hellos on multiple VLANs for discovery
> and send LSP only on one VLAN, one of the common ones.
> Can we then conclude that by default we send Hellos on a set
> of one or more configured VLANs with the set being equal to
> the active set of VLANs on that link by default ?
> On Tue, 2007-10-23 at 10:04 -0700, Anoop Ghanwani wrote:
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Dinesh G Dutt [mailto:ddutt at cisco.com]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 7:21 AM
> > > To: Silvano Gai
> > > Cc: Anoop Ghanwani; Radia Perlman; Developing a hybrid
> > > Subject: Re: [rbridge] Final outcome of outer VLAN
> > > tagsonRBridge-RBridgepackets?
> > >
> > > I agree that using a single VLAN solution for IS-IS DRB is weak.
> > > However, I'm skeptical that another protocol that also just sends
> > > Hellos is much more scalabale or better than IS-IS sending only
> > > Hellos on all configured VLANs.
> > Dinesh,
> > The key here is just sending hellos as opposed to
> maintaining a full
> > IS-IS adjacency on the VLAN. As long maintaining the
> adjancency and
> > sending LSPs on every VLAN is not required, the protocol
> that is used
> > for it doesn't matter.
> > Anoop
> "And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by
> those who could not hear the music." -- Angela Monet
More information about the rbridge