The MPLS WG Archive

[lidefeng <lidefeng@huawei.com>]

Thanks for your clarification,however,what I am concerned is why need a
"seperate LSP" for the extra traffic,i.e. why need a third LSP except the
working LSP and the protection LSP,as shown in Figure5 and Figre6 in Page 11
of Y.1720?



----- Original Message -----
From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: "lidefeng" <lidefeng@huawei.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 12:16 AM
Subject: Re: About "extra traffic" and "seperate LSP" in Y.1720


> Hi,
>
> 'Extra traffic' is low priority, best-effort traffic that can be displaced
at any time
> without anyone screaming.
>
> When there is a protected LSP with a working path and a protection path,
the working path
> carries 'working traffic' and the protection path may be idle. Extra
traffic can be placed
> on all or part of the protection path until such time as the working path
fails. At this
> time, the extra traffic is pre-empted and the working traffic is sent
along the protection
> path.
>
> Note well. This description only applies to 1:n (including 1:1)
protection. It does not
> apply to 1+1 protection.
>
> Clear?
>
> Regards,
> Adrian
> --
> Adrian Farrel
> Old Dog Consulting
> adrian@olddog.co.uk
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "lidefeng" <lidefeng@huawei.com>
> To: <mqureshi@lucent.com>
> Cc: <mpls@UU.NET>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 8:44 AM
> Subject: About "extra traffic" and "seperate LSP" in Y.1720
>
>
> > I have some confusion about Y.1720,
> >
> > 1. What's the relation between "working traffic" and "extra traffic"?
> >
> > 2. There is a concept "seperate LSP" in Y.1720,is it another LSP
different
> > from "working LSP" and "protection LSP",as shown in Figure5 and
Figure6,if
> > that is true,why the extra traffic need to be disconnected to make way
for
> > the protected traffic from the failed working connection when the
working
> > traffic is switched over to the protection LSP, as it is stated in
section
> > 7.1.1.2("Extra traffic" part)?
> >
> > Could you please clarify it for me?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Defeng Li
> > Huawei Technologies
> >
> >
>