The MPLS WG Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS WG Archive>month:2000-Oct> msg00327



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]  
  [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index]

Traffic engineering and RSVP

  • From: David Charlap <david.charlap@marconi.com>
  • Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 10:36:08 -0400
  • CC: Wushao Wen <wswen@bass.ece.ucdavis.edu>, Shahram Davari <Shahram_Davari@pmc-sierra.com>, "'Mike Badil'" <hasko10@hotmail.com>, mpls@UU.NET

Frank Hujber wrote:
> 
> If I understand what you say about RSVP, then I have to conclude that
> it is not acceptable for traffic engineering and therefore it is also
> unacceptable for MPLambdaS, given any need for the lambda path to be
> deterministic from the ingress point.
> 
> Am I missing something?

You're missing the fact that RSVP (aka RFC 2205) and RSVP-TE
(draft-ietf-mpls-rsvp-lsp-tunnel-*) are two different protocols.

Straight RSVP does not carry any routing information, and therefore can
not do traffic engineering by itself.  (Although it can work in
conjunction with a routing protocol that provides the missing feature.)

RSVP-TE, however, does carry explicit routing information.  It should be
sufficient for MPLambdaS.

-- David