The MPLS WG Archive

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

Hi,

I have been explicitly asked to lengthen this last call so as to allow time 
for a review.

Unusual, but not unreasonable.

The last call is extended to noon on Sunday 17th December.

Thanks,
Adrian
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: <ccamp@ops.ietf.org>
Cc: <jau@cbis.ece.drexel.edu>; "Ross Callon" <rcallon@juniper.net>; 
"Brungard, Deborah A, ALABS" <dbrungard@att.com>; <mpls@lists.ietf.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2006 11:06 AM
Subject: CCAMP Last call on draft-deoliveira-diff-te-preemption-06.txt


> Hi,
>
> This draft has been developed independently and has recently been brought 
> to the IESG for advancement as an individual submission to become an 
> Informational RFC. I have done a first-level review and this latest 
> revision includes updates to reflect my comments.
>
> Since the material here concerns preemption and the suggested ways to 
> operate an MPLS-TE or GMPLS network, we are running a quick last call on 
> the CCAMP mailing list to ensure that no-one has any objections.
>
> Please send your comments to the CCAMP list no later than noon GMT on 13th 
> December 2006.
>
> Thanks,
> Adrian
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: <Internet-Drafts@ietf.org>
> To: <i-d-announce@ietf.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 8:50 PM
> Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-deoliveira-diff-te-preemption-06.txt
>
>
>>A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
>> directories.
>>
>>
>> Title : LSP Preemption Policies for MPLS Traffic Engineering
>> Author(s) : J. de Oliveira, et al.
>> Filename : draft-deoliveira-diff-te-preemption-06.txt
>> Pages : 19
>> Date : 2006-11-28
>>
>> When the establishment of a higher priority (Traffic Engineering
>>   Label Switched Path) TE LSP requires the preemption of a set of lower
>>   priority TE LSPs, a node has to make a local decision to select which
>>
>>   TE LSPs will be preempted.  The preempted LSPs are then rerouted by
>>   their respective Head-end Label Switch Router (LSR).  This document
>>   presents a flexible policy that can be used to achieve different
>>   objectives: preempt the lowest priority LSPs; preempt the minimum
>>   number of LSPs; preempt the set of TE LSPs that provide the closest
>>   amount of bandwidth to the required bandwidth for the preempting TE
>>   LSPs (to minimize bandwidth wastage); preempt the LSPs that will have
>>   the maximum chance to get rerouted.  Simulation results are given and
>>   a comparison among several different policies, with respect to
>>   preemption cascading, number of preempted LSPs, priority, wasted
>>   bandwidth and blocking probability is also included.
>>
>> A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-deoliveira-diff-te-preemption-06.txt
>
>
>
>
>
> 



_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls