RE: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-tewg-mib-05.txt

Hi Bert,

On Wed, 3 Sep 2003, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:

> Kireeti, have you also considered if there is andy
> relationship or redundancy or overlap or such with
> RFC 2667. Maybe all is OK, but I just want to make sure we
> check. I had asked same question on MPLS list for te-link MIB.

The IP Tunnel MIB and the TE Tunnel MIB are quite orthogonal.  About
the only thing they share is a 'local' and a 'remote' address,
although in the case of the IP Tunnel MIB, these are IPv4 endpoint
addresses, but for TE Tunnels, these could be IPv4/IPv6 prefixes or
even AS numbers.  The rest is pretty different -- explicit (source)
routing, multiple paths, constraints, etc.

Kireeti.