a couple of high-view questions

On Mon, 15 May 2006, James Kempf wrote:
> So that means I must run OSPF in the localized mobility
management domain, 
> right? Does IS-IS have this feature too? Also, we do
want something that 
> works well with MPLS, due to the traffic engineering
considerations, as 
> mentioned.

Yes, this is supported by IS-IS as well.  On BGP, this is
trivial, but 
BGP may have other properties why it's not necessarily the
best 
candidate for this.  This model is compatible with MPLS
AFAIK.

Here are some pointers for people interested.

IS-IS: (route leaking is not needed, but this doc explains
the 
information propagation model) 
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tec
h/tk365/technologies_tech_note09186a0080093f39.shtml
  * in this case, you'd make the ARs level-1 routers, and
their 
neighbors (possibly the MAP via a tunnel) are
level-1/level-2 routers 
or level-2 routers.

OSPF:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tec
h/tk365/technologies_tech_note09186a0080094aaa.shtml
  * in this case, each AR would belong to its own stub or
totally stub 
area.

HTH,

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves
king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash
of Kings
_______________________________________________
netlmm mailing list
netlmmngnet.it
https://vesuvio.ipv6.cselt.it/mailman/listinfo/netlmm