The MPLS WG Archive

["Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>]

Curtis,

Don't worry.
I will publish a summary as soon as people have had a chance to respond.
It only been a few days, and many people were travelling.

Additionally, I have had some problems with personal emails. If anyone responded to me
privately, can I ask them to re-send just in case.

Thanks,
Adrian
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Curtis Villamizar" <curtis@workhorse.fictitious.org>
To: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
Cc: "'mpls@uu.net'" <mpls@UU.NET>
Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 1:25 PM
Subject: Re: Soft/hard pre-emption


>
> 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
>