[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Basic doubts on 1:1 path protection signaling.
Balasubramania N. Pillai wrote:
Hi All,
I was reading the draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-recovery-e2e-signaling-00.txt and I
have some basic doubts regarding signaling 1:1 protected LSP with extra
traffic.
1. My understanding is that Section 7 talks about 1:1 Protection (the
protection path is fully setup and cross-connects are made) and not 1:1
Restoration (no cross-connects for protection path)
as the title indicates and explained in the text
2. Since the protection LSP is setup (cross-connected), I guess we should
advertise that the resources used by the Protection LSP as "in use" in
routing.
if it is cross-connected it is "in use"
3. Section 7, Paragraph 3 says that
Although the resources for the protecting LSP are pre-allocated,
preemptable traffic may be carried end-to-end using this LSP (i.e.
the protecting LSP is capable of carrying extra-traffic) with the
caveat that this traffic will be preempted if the working LSP fails.
Take the case where a 1:1 LSP is setup. Both the working LSP and the
protection LSP are setup and cross-connected. Now if we want to add a
extra-traffic, how do we signal, to setup the LSP carrying the Extra
traffic.
the protecting lsp allows carrying extra-traffic (in a sense you may see
for the 1:1 protection case, the protecting lsp as the "extra-traffic
lsp" but this terminology is misleading reason why it is not used)
What objects do we use to associate the "Extra Traffic LSP" to the
protection LSP.
the association object is used to bind the protected and the protecting lsp
hope this clarifies (note: an update is being prepared to further
clarify some of the comments made on the list)
thanks,
- dimitri
Thanks for you time
Balu
--
Papadimitriou Dimitri
E-mail : dimitri.papadimitriou@alcatel.be
E-mail : dpapadimitriou@psg.com
Webpage: http://psg.com/~dpapadimitriou/
Address: Fr. Wellesplein 1, B-2018 Antwerpen, Belgium
Phone : +32 3 240-8491