The MPLS WG Archive

[Curtis Villamizar <curtis@workhorse.fictitious.org>]

In message <010701c3a869$f1437bf0$db818182@Puppy>, "Adrian Farrel" writes:
> As my first step in resolving this issue I would like to conduct a brief surv
> ey amongst
> implementors.
> 
> Please feel free to respond to me off-list and in confidence. If you do not w
> ant your
> information shared more widely, please state that explicitly in your email.
> 
> Also, please note that this questionnaire is NOT a discussion of what is the 
> correct
> behavior. It is simply collecting information about interpretation of RFCs 22
> 05 and 3209.
> 
> Thanks,
> Adrian
> 
> Questions:
> 
> 1. When your implementation receives a PathErr message indicating pre-emption
>  for an
> established LSP, does it tear the LSP (i.e. release labels) or only release r
> esources
> (i.e. leave the LSP in place as 'best effort')?
> In other words, is your default behavior hard or soft pre-emption?
> 
> 2. When your implementation receives any other (non-notify) PathErr for an es
> tablished
> LSP, does it tear the LSP (i.e. release labels) or leave it in place?
> 
> 3. Is your code carrying live traffic, in lab tests, or in development?
> 
> 4. If deployed, can you give me a feeling for the number of LSRs in the field
>  (just an
> order of magnitude)?
> 
> Thanks,
> Adrian



I don't remember seeing a summary of answers on this.

Curtis