 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
Your understanding is correct. You can bunch a number of address prefixes and assign them to the same label. But why do you think a hop count TLV is needed?
-Shahram
From: mpls-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf Of priyanka gupta
Sent: May-15-08 10:58 AM
To: mpls at ietf.org
Subject: [mpls] Doubt related to RFC 5036
hello all,
Can anybody help in understanding the statement in RFC 5036
"A FEC is a list of one or more FEC elemets".
For example,
If there are three LDP enabled routers A--B--C.
50.50.50.1 ,50.50.50.2, 50.50.50.3 , 50.50.50.4 are the four /32 host connetced to the router C..
Router C will advertise four label associated with four /32 host.
So in the label mapping message,can router C aggregrate all the four FEC TLV and associated label with it or not?
will all four mentioned /32 host will be called FEC element of a FEC??
Can i really club the label mapping messages and send in one label mapping message??please help me to understand this.
If we really can do this then in that case label mapping message should have a list of hop count TLV too,which is not specified in RFC.
Meet people who discuss and share your passions. Join them now.
_______________________________________________ mpls mailing list mpls at ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls