The MPLS WG Archive

["Cheng-Yin Lee" <leecy@nortelnetworks.com>]

Curtis,

Do you agree that :
1) the scaling issues in IGPs, are a result of fully-meshing routers, not a
result of using independent control planes
2)  service providers who have requirements to fully-mesh routers  (for simple
edge to edge traffic measurement, bandwidth management, control, as described by
Vijay)  have to setup fully-meshed circuits,  VCs or LSPs. The needs of  service
providers to fully-mesh routers do not arise because of ATM (or MPLS).

thanks,
cyl

Vijay Gill wrote:

> This, along with some hierarchy, allows for precise traffic measurement
> between router-router flows and at the city-pair level, and results in
> fairly tractable flow data that can be used to predict traffic levels,
> allowing for proper sizing of sPVC contracts, etc.  These contracts are
> then used by the ATM switch software to do constrained based routing of
> sPVCs, allowing the network operators to do a good job of traffic
> engineering and circuit layout/capacity planning.
>
> This might explain why people have gone with the extra expense (both in
> capex and SGnA) and complexity to implement a fully meshed ATM solution.
>
> /vijay