[email protected]
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: questions on draft-bryant-ipfrr-tunnels-01.txt

Subject: Re: questions on draft-bryant-ipfrr-tunnels-01.txt
From: Alia Atlas
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 13:27:09 -0500
Hi Naiming,

At 01:01 PM 11/22/2004, Naiming Shen wrote:
We need to arrive at a method that is simpler and easier to use than RSVP-TE source-routed tunnels. Otherwise, the only benefit we'd get from an advanced IPFRR method is that it "isn't MPLS", and that's not sufficient IMHO.
It does not have to be "MPLS" if you consider the IP TE mechanism though
Sure. We can have a different protocol in the network solely for
resiliency to create those source-routed tunnels with the associated
complexity, but at least it wouldn't be MPLS :-)
I do think that the complexity of the mechanism we select for an advanced
IPFRR method has to be bounded by a consideration of what other potential
solutions exist.
If a mechanism is more complicated to understand, manage, and configure
than RSVP-TE, then I think we need to seriously consider where the benefit is.

Rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]

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