The MPLS WG Archive[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index] Preemption TLV in CR-LDP
Hi Subodh, I can offer you a couple of references... >From section 2.3... The exact rules determining bumping are an aspect of network policy. Which implies that although the ingress has a right to expect some generalized behavior based on holding and setup priorities, they can not precisely predict the rules for bumping that will be applied in the network. >From section 4.4... The default value of the setup and holding priorities should be in the middle of the range (e.g., 4) I would suggest that if the Preemption TLV is not present the sender is not bothered about the risk of being bumped. This means that each LSR can apply whatever local network policy it likes (although ideally this would be co-ordinated across the network). It would make sense to me to choose from - use "default values" - use lowest values Regards, Adrian -- Adrian Farrel mailto:af@datcon.co.uk Network Convergence Group Data Connection Ltd., Chester, UK http://www.datcon.co.uk/ Tel: +44 (0) 1244 313440 Fax: +44 (0) 1244 312422 >-----Original Message----- >From: Subodh Mathur [mailto:subodh@dtix.com] >Sent: Friday, April 21, 2000 3:22 PM >To: Peter Ashwood-Smith; mpls; Bilel Jamoussi >Subject: Preemption TLV in CR-LDP > > >Hi, >How will setting up of a CR LSP with Preemption TLV will deal with an >existing CR LSP which has been setup without using optional >Preemption TLV?. >Assuming there is a contention of resources between them. The draft on >CR-LDP does not make it clear or I might have missed it. >Thanks, >Subodh Mathur >Digital Technology Inc., >Bedford, MA 01730 > |
|