[Tony Li] : RE : RE : RE : Last call for draft-ietf-tewg-interarea-mpls-te-req-01.txt

["Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>]

Final (?) non-member post

> Subject: Re: RE : RE : RE : Last call for draft-ietf-tewg-interarea-mpls-te-req-01.txt 
> Date: Fri, 28 May 2004 02:39:47 -0700
> To: "LE ROUX Jean-Louis FTRD/DAC/LAN" <jeanlouis.leroux@francetelecom.com>
> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.618)
> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on psg.com
> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_SORBS 
> autolearn=no version=2.63
> X-Spam-Level: 
> 
> > No, computation can be distributed on ABRs. This is basically the 
> > scenario 4 of
> > draft-kompella-mpls-multiarea-te :
> > "The head-end LSR requests one of the ABRs in the head-end area to
> >    compute a path to the destination. When the ABR in the head-end area
> >    receives the request, the ABR requests one of the ABRs in the tail-
> >    end area to compute paths to the destination from all/some of the
> >    ABRs in the tail-end area. Once the ABR in the head-end area obtains
> >    this information from the ABR in the tail-end area, the ABR in the
> >    head-end area could compute the path through the head-end and the
> >    backbone areas, concatenates the results of this computation with 
> > the
> >    appropriate path through the tail-end area, and then return the
> >    result to the head-end LSR."
> 
> 
> Well, yes, that could be made to work.  Pretty ugly tho (sorry Kireeti 
> ;-).
> 
> Again, I'm happy to make the tradeoff of less work for less optimality.
> If I'm that concerned about optimality, then I'll do offline computation
> and static configuration.  Or human intervention.  I'm not interested in
> spending the rest of my life debugging an incredibly complex solution 
> that
> gives me the last 0.0001% of optimality.
> 
> Tony
> 
> 
> 
>