The MPLS WG Archive

[David Charlap <David.Charlap@marconi.com>]

jeff pickering wrote:
> Also note that there is a history of this since the hellos in rfc3209 are
> not specific to rsvp-te either.

I remember that discussion.  But it's not quite the same.

RSVP-Hello was originally introduced in the Refresh Reduction draft. 
The working group elected to get rid of it, on the grounds that Hellos 
change the fundamental nature of RSVP from soft-state to hard-state.  It 
was adopted MPLS working group (and incorporated into RSVP-TE) because 
the RSVP working group had rejected it.

Without rehashing the merits of that decision, I'd just like to point 
out that this situation is a bit different.

A parallel situation would be if unnumbered links and restart capability 
were proposed as a part of RSVP-TE, and were then rejected by the MPLS 
working group, and then adopted by CCAMP for use in generalized-RSVP-TE.

But to my knowledge, it didn't go this way.  As far as I know, these 
extensions were originally created as a part of the generalized-RSVP-TE 
work.  And that's fine.  Any group that develops something useful should 
be able to do so.  But now that these features are designed, and they 
are seen as desirable in the non-generalized architecture, the question 
is how (if at all) they should be ported to that architecture.

-- David