The MPLS WG Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS WG Archive>month:2002-Jan> msg00104



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

Is RSVP-TE Label Request optional?

  • From: "Sean Crocker" <crockers@mail.trinicom.com>
  • Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 10:52:52 -0600

>Hi all,
>        According to RFC 3209 section 4.2.4 says that "
>
>	If a LABEL_REQUEST object was not present in the Path
>   message, a node MUST NOT include a LABEL object in a Resv message for
>   that Path message's session and PHOP."
>
>
>        But, in section 3.1, the PATH message format shows LABEL_REQUEST 
>as not an optional object.
>        Is not it contradictory? Or, should I take it as a way to make 
>RSVP-TE behave as vanilla RSVP, if somebody wanted to do so?
>        Can anybody help me out of this dilemma?

I think the verbiage in 4.2.4 is meant to cover RSVP and RSVP-TE
operating in the same network, simply making sure "regular" PATHs don't
trigger LABEL objects in the reply RESVs.  Keeping track of resources
allocated for regular RSVP vs. TE might be another issue.

Sean