The MPLS WG Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS WG Archive>month:2001-Apr> msg00070



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

Last Call on RSVP Label Allocation for Backup Tunnels

  • From: Curtis Villamizar <curtis@workhorse.fictitious.org>
  • Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2001 20:57:36 -0400
  • cc: Bora Akyol <akyol@pluris.com>, Dave Cooper <dcooper@gblx.net>, mpls@UU.NET


In message <3ACA8670.59713EAC@juniper.net>, Ping Pan writes:
> Bora Akyol wrote:
> > 
> > Ping
> > 
> > At least in one implementation of APS and FR that I am familiar with, the
> > timing to generate a switchover between the two is very close in terms of
> > failover and in this particular implementation, APS switchover timing meets
> > less than 50 ms.
> > 
> > So I would not immediately rule out FR timing in place of APS.
> > 
> > Bora
> 
> Bora,
> 
> I was pointing out that the fail-over time can be *unpredictable* at
> protocol level, where a link failure may trigger heavy processing among
> many protocols (such as BGP and RSVP). I have no doubt that if you put a
> link detection routine within link card's driver or something, the
> failover time can be quite fast.
> 
> - Ping


And since 10s of msec is a goal, why would you put it anywhere other
than right on the forwarding cards?

Curtis