The MPLS WG Archive[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index] Clarification on Handling a specific event in LDP
Eric, Please see below... Eric W. Gray Systems Architect Celox Networks, Inc. egray@celoxnetworks.com 508 305 7214 > --- [snip] Jack> (5) Advertise using a non-NULL label, without withdrawing the Jack> NULL label. The upstream peer *might* realize what you are Jack> trying to do... > > This will probably upset the peer. That depends on what you mean by "upset". Assuming we do not have to worry about the defective implementation case, the worst that could happen is for the peer to decide that the session is compromised and reset it. That would be BAD, but it would also be very unusual. Any reasonably robust implementation would simply release the unsolicited label mapping if it does not know what else to do with it. > > Once you withdraw a label, you have to wait for the upstream > peer to request a new label. The upstream peer could > probably get away with requesting a new label immediately, > not percolating the withdraw upstream unless the new > request is refused. Or the upstream peer could just percolate > the withdraws upstream, in which case the ingress would have to > reinitiate a request. I don't really see what else could be > done without causing interoperability problems. This case does not have the LSR withdraw the label. Even if the LSR does withdraw the label after advertising a new one (assuming it does not get a release for either of the outstanding Label Mappings), by that time, the upstream LSR should have a replacement label and will not need to either request one or withdraw corresponding labels from upstream LSR peers. |
|