The MPLS WG Archive

["Ramana V Gollamudi" <rgollamu@newbridge.com>]

Hansen,

I think the critical point is about how up to date the TE database information
is.  Using link state IGPs is one convenient way of gathering the latest
apporpriate information required to compute the path of LSPs. Then, where the
computation is done is matter of convenience and effeciency.

Ramana

HANSEN CHAN wrote:

> Dan,
>
> To make sure I understand. Do you mean the path of LSPs is computed on the
> node, not by software tools?
>
> Thanks,
> Hansen
>
> Daniel Awduche wrote:
>
> > Actually, the original assertion/generalization is false
> > (i.e. that "LSPs in today's MPLS network are usually computed
> > off-node").
> >
> > Cheers,
> > /Dan
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 20, 2000 at 02:08:22PM -0400, Anoop Ghanwani wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > I am trying to understanding the use of TE extension of IGP in a MPLS
> > > > network. From my understanding, you need TE extension when you're doing
> > > > on-node path computation. However, since LSPs in today's MPLS network
> > >                                                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > >
> > > We're hoping it won't stay that way forever because it's limiting
> > > to have to rely on offline tools for all traffic engineering :-)
> > >
> > > That means that traffic engineering would need to be more dynamic,
> > > and the routers would play a more active role in determining paths
> > > and possibly doing network optimization.  Hence the IGP extensions.
> > >
> > > > are usually computed off-node (in software tool), why would the use of
> > > > TE extension be critical?
> > > >
> > > > Appreciate if someone can shed some light on this question.
> > >