[c-nsp] PPPoE Session Limit?

[Marko Milivojevic]

> possibly some obscure bug, IMHO we should reject "ip address ..."
> command on a vtemplate alltogether, it doesn't make sense.

	This reminds me of a fun issue we had the other day. We use unnumbered 
(loopback1) Virtual-Templates in a VRF. In that particular VRF, we were not 
redistributing connected routes, instead we had all interfaces participate 
in OSPF with network statements. Loopback IP was also there... Some may see 
where this goes ;-).

	We were sending hello's on few thousand interfaces and CPU didn't quite 
like it. To make things even more fun, there is no "passive-interface 
default" in VRF in an image that suits our needs :-).

	Rejecting IP address in the config AND not treating "ip unnumbered x" as a 
valid IP address for routing protocol participation would be great feature, 
thank you ;-)



Marko.