The MPLS WG Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS WG Archive>month:2004-Oct> msg00006



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]  
  [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index]

[mpls] RSVP-TE control message forwarding

  • From: JP Vasseur <jvasseur@cisco.com>
  • Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 14:25:20 -0400
  • Cc: mpls@ietf.org

Hi,

On Oct 1, 2004, at 7:40 PM, Ning Zhuang wrote:

Hi All,
 
I’d like to ask a question related to RSVP-TE control messages forwarding. Assume CSPF is not turned on, do we
want to allow the RSVP-TE control messages to go through MPLS LSPs?

Path computation is orthogonal to signaling: in other words, the path can be computed in a distributed or centralized fashion, using CSPF or any other algorithms. Then RSVP-TE is in charge of establishing the TE LSP by means of signaling.

A further question would be when we
do the nexthop lookup for the RSVP-TE control messages, do we considered the IGP shortcut routes? (This question
apply to both ingress and transit nodes).

On the topic of how to steer traffic to a particular TE LSP instead of following the IGP shortest path, should both paths be distinct, there are several mechanisms: take the TE LSP into account during RIB computation, use of static route for specific traffic and so on.

Also, does anybody know Cisco’s implementation for this issue?

Since this is an IETF mailing list, it is probably more appropriate to ask the question on other lists. In short, the answer is yes, and there are many possible mechanisms.

JP.

 
Thanks,
 
Ning Zhuang

Samsung Enterprise Network Lab
P. (408)-544-4615
F. (408)-544-4617
nzhuang@sta.samsung.com
 
_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls