The MPLS WG Archive

[<Mazen.Khaddam@cox.com>]

Here at Cox, our BB is fully meshed with of TE LSPs between our
core-edge routers with link protection. Based on our history, we have
not seen a node failure yet.

-----Original Message-----
From: Kireeti Kompella [mailto:kireeti@juniper.net] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 2:56 PM
To: LE ROUX Jean-Louis RD-CORE-LAN
Cc: mpls@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [mpls] RE: Comments on
draft-leroux-mpls-p2mp-te-bypass-00.txt

Hi Jean-Louis,

To re-iterate my comment in the WG, in general, node protection, 
whether for p2p or p2mp LSPs, is an order of magnitude less scalable 
than link protection.

I think we should step back at this point, and request SPs and others 
deploying MPLS networks to share with the WG: frequencies of link 
failures, node software failures (node recovers), node failures 
(requires manual intervention), and battery explosions, to give us a 
sense of the importance of continuing the work on node protection.

I realize that some of these figures may be sensitive, but even 
normalized numbers may be useful.

Kireeti.
-------

_______________________________________________
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