[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Intra-area Crankback
- To: "Don Fedyk" <dwfedyk@nortelnetworks.com>
- Subject: RE: Intra-area Crankback
- From: "Ash, Gerald R (Jerry), ALCTA" <gash@att.com>
- Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 12:16:33 -0500
- Cc: "Ash, Gerald R (Jerry), ALCTA" <gash@att.com>, "Adrian Farrel" <afarrel@movaz.com>, "Atsushi Iwata" <iwata@ccm.CL.nec.co.jp>, "Norihito Fujita" <n-fujita@bk.jp.nec.com>, "Simon Marshall-Unitt" <smu@dataconnection.com>, "ccamp" <ccamp@ops.ietf.org>
Hi Don,
don> The feedback draft is intended for this type of operation.
don> Feedback is best within the area crank back is best outside
don> the area. We discussed all of this with the original authors
don> many many times.
don> Crankback is a primitive from of feedback.
I recall perhaps one or two 'hallway discussions' along this line. Personally I think that feedback and crankback do different things, one is not a replacement for the other. Feedback feeds information to the TED, crankback is a reroute-notify to the head-end or border LSR. One can emulate a 'crankback' with a failure-notify, just as well as interpreting a feedback TLV as a 'crankback'. It is not the same as crankback nor a replacement for it.
Both can provide needed functionality.
Regards,
Jerry