nanog mailing list archives
RE: IS-IS IPAM platform
From: "Aaron Gould" <aaron1 () gvtc com>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2020 15:11:27 -0500
Our atm network in san diego was the full base 16 hex for the 13 byte nsap prefix of all the atm switches in our 4-level PNNI cloud This may be slightly off topic of ISIS practices though But, yeah, we didn't encode any switch mgmt. ip into the nsap addressing as I recall... just the pnni peer groups had hex identities -Aaron -----Original Message----- From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces () nanog org] On Behalf Of Bryan Holloway Sent: Monday, April 13, 2020 12:46 PM To: Randy Bush; Tom Beecher Cc: Nanog Subject: Re: IS-IS IPAM platform I've always wondered about folks' opinions about one thing, though: In y'all's opinion, do you prefer/recommend using base-10 digits or hex in your NSAP addresses? I like the former for readability, but the latter can (could) be better for automation. Maybe. I got into a heated argument about this once with ATM back in the day, but my brain's to frazzled to remember the takeaways. On 4/13/20 7:37 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
Just encode the router loopback IPv4 address in the system identifier bytes and call it a day.i think asp wrote this up back in the early '90s. anyone have a cite? randy
Current thread:
- IS-IS IPAM platform JASON BOTHE via NANOG (Apr 13)
- Re: IS-IS IPAM platform Tom Beecher (Apr 13)
- Re: IS-IS IPAM platform Bryan Holloway (Apr 13)
- Re: IS-IS IPAM platform Musa Stephen Honlue (Apr 13)
- Re: IS-IS IPAM platform Randy Bush (Apr 13)
- Re: IS-IS IPAM platform Bryan Holloway (Apr 13)
- Re: IS-IS IPAM platform Randy Bush (Apr 13)
- RE: IS-IS IPAM platform Aaron Gould (Apr 13)
- Re: IS-IS IPAM platform Tom Beecher (Apr 13)