The MPLS WG Archive

["janani" <jananik@future.futsoft.com>]

hello,

     i am at present reading the draft "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP Tunnels (draft-ietf-mpls-rsvp-lsp-tunnel-07.txt)"

i have the following doubts.

1.  in section 2.4.2., while explaining the Wildcard Filter (WF) Reservation Style it is said that .."This style is useful for applications in which not all senders send traffic at the same time.......If,however, all senders send simultaneously, then there is no means of getting the proper reservations made. Either the reserved bandwidth on links close to the destination will be less than what is required or then the reserved bandwidth on links close to some senders will be greater than what is required. This restricts the applicability of WF for traffic engineering purposes."

  

..but what i feel is that the same overhead that is described above could also apply for Shared Explicit Reservation style also. if i am missing anything here could anyone point out the difference in the two reservation styles ?

 

 

2.        in the same section it is said that ".....because of the merging rules of WF, EXPLICIT_ROUTE objects cannot be used with WF reservations. "

 

can anyone point out the reason as to why WF resv style does not use ERO.

 pointers to archives could aslo be sufficent.

 

thanks and regards,

janani.