[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: Stewart Bryant
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 11:54:00 +0000
You definitely have an advantage in providing FRR for IP multicast.  I
question whether that is a requirement for anyone.  FRR seems to be
popular among those doing VOIP which is unicase, and VPNs.  The VPNs
are typically LDP.  Often the VOIP resides within an LDP VPN.  There
is existance proof that you can run VOIP over LDP over MPLS/TE quite
nicely and use MPLS FRR.

So far there hasn't been a lot of interest in multicast over MPLS
because those providers doing MPLS are not seeing a lot of multicast
traffic (and some don't offer native multicast) so they are fine with
offering multicast over IP with no TE or FRR.
No, but video providers doing TV over IP use multicast, and I would
have thought that they would have been interested in a fast-reroute
capability that supported multicast. However there are simplications
that one might be able to apply to such applications.

- Stewart

Rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]

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