The MPLS WG Archive[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index] [Rsvp] RE: IANA Considerations for RSVP
Friends, In trying to sort out how we should have handled RSVP_TE and all its offspring, it is instructive to read RFC 2814 that describes the Subnet Bandwidth Manager (SBM). Like RSVP-TE and its offspring, the SBM was an RSVP-like protocol for signaling at the link layer. It is carefully documented as a distinct protocol, alhtough in fact there are RSVP extensions for the SBM. It leaves RSVP as a network- (i.e., Internet-)layer protocol, as it was originally designed. I believe using the SBM approach for RSVP-TE would have avoided some of the problems we are seeing today. To imply, as I often see done, that RSVP-TE is "just RSVP with a few extensions" was and is dishonest. Its semantics are fundamentally different in important ways, even if the syntax is the same. There is more to protocols than bit and byte formats. Do we need to have this discussion of 3 large mailing lists? Bob Braden |
|