From: Mark Lasarko (mlasarko@co.ba.md.us)
Date: Fri May 20 2005 - 18:48:46 GMT-3
Greetings Tim,
Really?
I thought for sure IPv6 required this??
Something about the TLV's which advertise IPv6 info only being able to use
wide metrics...
I had not intended the question to be interpreted in the context of use for
IPv4 metrics > 63
Sorry if the question was not clear the way it was worded.
~M
>>> "ccie2be" <ccie2be@nyc.rr.com> 05/20/05 5:06 PM >>>
mark,
Unless you're told to use wide metrics either explicitly (unlikely) or
implicitly ( count the ways this could be done), I wouldn't start adding
misc commands to your config except for alias' or other "shopkeeping"
functions.
Unless you need to have isis metrics that go higher than 63, I think, don't
bother.
But, to each their own.
Tim
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of Mark
Lasarko
Sent: Friday, May 20, 2005 2:30 PM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: isis metric-style transition
Greetings GS,
Aside from the extra TLV's generated...
Is it a good idea to use this option in the lab?
Are there other reasons we should stick to "wide"?
TIA,
~M
BTW - I also noticed this recent memo relating to the subject:
M-ISIS: Multi Topology (MT) Routing in IS-IS
http://bgp.potaroo.net/ietf/ids/draft-ietf-isis-wg-multi-topology-10.txt
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jun 03 2005 - 10:11:59 GMT-3