The MPLS WG Archive[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index] RSVP-TE vs LDP
Syed, Basically they are two alternatives that approach the problem from different perspectives; Alternative 1 Take a well established, well tested, existing protocol for signaling QoS over IP networks (viz., RSVP), and extend it to support both label distribution and path setup based on explicit routes. Use the existing and developing IP QoS model, so as to leverage past and ongoing IETF work on QoS and on signaling of QoS. Alternative 2 Extend the newly designed LDP protocol to add explicit route setup and QoS signaling, thereby creating CR-LDP. Both alternatives proceeded by taking a protocol and extending it into areas beyond its original intended application. Both alternatives added explicit route support to protocols, which originally did not have it. The real difference is whether to take a QoS signaling protocol and add label distribution, or whether to take a label distribution protocol and add QoS signaling. It seems that more vendors vote for alternative 1. I'll send you a separate e-mail with a PDF from Data Conenctions Ltd. in the UK comparing the two protocols. Chris At 08:58 AM 10/10/2001, syed ali wrote: Guys,
|
|