The MPLS WG Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS WG Archive>month:2002-Nov> msg00145



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

Load balancing draft

  • From: George Swallow <swallow@cisco.com>
  • Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 11:20:00 -0500
  • cc: George Swallow <swallow@cisco.com>, Shahram Davari <Shahram_Davari@pmc-sierra.com>, "'MPLS@UU.net'" <MPLS@UU.NET>, swallow@cisco.com

> Why is it not incrementally useful?  Every LSR along the path that does 
> this decreases the cases where an OAM packet may take a different route 
> from the data packet.   It does require every LSR to implement to 
> completely avoid OAM packets from taking different routes, but 
> incrementally does simplify determining what happened to the OAM packets as 
> compared to the data plane packets because there are fewer potential branch 
> points.

Well if you want your CV OAM to make you pretty sure, then yes, you
get surer as you incrementally deploy.  But most of the time you can
be pretty sure with much lighter overhead.  So I was assuming (perhaps
incorectly) that someone who want to send a CV OAM packet every second
wanted to be 100% sure.

...George

==================================================================
George Swallow       Cisco Systems                  (978) 497-8143
                     250 Apollo Drive
                     Chelmsford, Ma 01824