Hi Nic,
On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, Nic Neate wrote:
> The issue with that is not with overlap in the problems they are solving,
> but in recovering FRR backup and protected LSPs (which may not be being
> refreshed from upstream) after a restart. Is this a problem that interests
> you?
Thanks for clarifying. I agree that networks will have both GR and
FRR. In principle, I agree that this (recovering FRR sessions during
GR) is a problem that needs to be solved. However, the premise here
is that during GR (hopefully a small time window, say a couple of
minutes), you have a second failure (of a link or a node).
Yes, it's possible to have multiple failures, but the combination of a
control plane failure recoverable by GR and a link/node failure that
requires FRR seems remote.
A practical solution (that may not satisfy all) is for GR to recover
'regular' LSPs sessions, and to re-initiate FRR sessions; and to abort
GR if a second failure occurs that would have necessitated FRR.
On the other hand, let me not discourage you. Let's take a look at
solutions, and see how simple/complex they are before ruling on the
protocol work.
Kireeti.
-------