The MPLS WG Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS WG Archive>month:2001-Sep> msg00418



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

RSVP RRE related question ( RFC2961 )

  • From: "Hariom P" <hmp123@hotmail.com>
  • Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2001 17:17:30 -0700
  • X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Oct 2001 00:17:30.0979 (UTC) FILETIME=[75D22B30:01C14A0E]
  • X-Originating-IP: [216.175.91.100]

I would appreciate if authors/anyone could clarify my doubt ...

Here is a paragraph from RFC2691 :
"Note, a node that supports reliable RSVP message delivery (Section 4)
   but not Bundle and Srefresh messages, will not set the Refresh-
   Reduction-Capable bit."


any specific reason why RELIABILITY extensions were made not require setting 
of the RRE capable bit?

What i am trying to get to i, why RRE in general is made negotiable( with 
RRE capable bit ), but not the RELIABILITY feature? I mean we could have 
used two bit flag with 1 bit for just RLIABLITY capability while the other 
bit for entire RRE extension capability?


with regards,
hmp



_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp