The MPLS WG Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS WG Archive>month:2001-Dec> msg00271



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

MPLSOAM BOF meeting draft minutes

  • From: Curtis Villamizar <curtis@workhorse.fictitious.org>
  • Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:36:06 -0500
  • cc: "'curtis@fictitious.org'" <curtis@fictitious.org>, Ping Pan <pingpan@juniper.net>, "Ash, Gerald R (Jerry), ALCTA" <gash@att.com>, mpls@UU.NET


In message <4B6D09F3B826D411A67300D0B706EFDE84A48B@nt-exch-yow.pmc-sierra.bc.ca
> > 
> > And since the RESV Path must exist for the LSP to remain signaled you
> > have no valid argument pertaining to the lack of a reverse path.
> > Good.  We're making progress.
> 
> Your assumption: "RESV Path must exist for the LSP" is wrong. What about LDP,
>  CR-LDP, BGP or even
> configured LSPs that don't have RESV path. I think you are assuming everybody
> MUST use RSVP-TE.
> 
> -Shahram


LDP has a set of TCP paths so its signal path must have integrity.
Therefore the network is not partitioned.  If IP routing is not
working you'll have plenty of alarms to tell you that unless we're
talking about a operator with no clue whatsoever.

I wouldn't mind continuing this conversation but it does not seem
productive and I have some pudding to finish.

Curtis