Re: Bandwidth modification in GMPLS

["manoj juneja" <manojkumarjuneja@hotmail.com>]

Hi All,
         If the bandwidth modification is not supported by GMPLS then
it should be clearly mentioned in the drafts (at least the architecture
draft). Please see the attached mail for reference.

I am still not clear whether GMPLS supports SE-style of reservation.
My original question related to SE-style of reservation was and I didn't
get any reply on the mailing list :

      "  I have a doubt related to SE style of reservation in GMPLS. As
in RSVP-TE, multiple senders can share the reservation but they can be
assigned different labels to distinguish different senders from one
other.
In GMPLS, as the label itself is a resource on the link, it means that
if there are multiple senders in the same session sharing reservation,
they should be assigned the same label. They can't be assigned
different labels or is it that GMPLS does not support SE style of
reservation ?"

Please correct me if I am missing something.

Regards,
manoj.


>From: Maarten Vissers <mvissers@lucent.com>
>To: manoj juneja <manojkumarjuneja@hotmail.com>
>CC: ccamp@ops.ietf.org
>Subject: Re: Bandwidth modification in GMPLS
>Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 11:45:25 +0100
>
>Manoj,
>
>manoj juneja wrote:
> >
> > Hi All,
> >         Is it possible to modify/increase the bandwidth of an existing 
>GMPLS
> > tunnel ? I mean to say if I establish a VC-3 SDH LSP, will it be 
>possible to
> > increase the bandwidth to say VC-4 ?
>
>No, this is not possible.
>
>Regards,
>
>Maarten
>
> >
> > Should the new request be considered independent of previous one ?
> >
> > Regards,
> > manoj.
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at 
>http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
><< mvissers.vcf >>


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp