[email protected]
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: node disjoint and SRLG (was: questions on draft-bryant-ipfrr-tunnels

Subject: Re: node disjoint and SRLG was: questions on draft-bryant-ipfrr-tunnels-01.txt
From: Alia Atlas
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 11:03:32 -0500
Mke,
At 05:08 AM 11/23/2004, mike shand wrote:
One issue that I see for the non-source-routed tunnel based approach is that it uses the original next-next-hop as a proxy for a set of destinations. It is possible that the path from the next-next-hop to a particular destination will not be available because it traverses a link in the same SRLG.
I think that this may make the destination assignment a bit trickier.
Well, by analogy with the node failure case, one way to deal with this is
to consider a separate repair to the far side of each SRLG. I'm not sure
it is always necessary, but I think it is sufficeient.
But what is the far side of the SRLG? Trimming the trees after they're
computed makes some sense, but then it a next-next-hop is dependent on the
same SRLG to reach a destination, that destination won't be given an
alternate (where there might be one without the proxying).
Alia




_______________________________________________
Rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>