RE: draft-ashwood-ccamp-gmpls-constraints

["Don Fedyk" <dwfedyk@nortel.com>]

Igor

Thanks for the feedback I would like to work with you to capture the
Virtual Link Mode into the draft. 

Regards,
Don 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ibryskin@movaz.com [mailto:ibryskin@movaz.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 5:32 AM
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I believe this is a very useful draft. The described blocking 
> problem (a limited ability of a node to cross-connect 
> resources on input and output links wrt a particular LSP) 
> exists not only in the Virtual Node scenario: there could be 
> "real" network elements experiencing the problem (perhaps, 
> because of the hardware limitations). Hence there is a need 
> for a routing controller to be capable to advertise a map of 
> acceptable (or
> unacceptable) input-output link combinations, and for a path 
> computer to account for such a constraint (which is not trivial).
> 
> I also would suggest the authors to consider the Virtual Link 
> mode, that is, representing the domain to the outside world 
> as a bunch of PEs interconnected by abstract (virtual) links. 
> This approach may require more advertisements compared to the 
> Virtual Node mode; however, it does relieve external path 
> computers from handling the interface maps, plus it gives the 
> idea about the cost and attributes of feasible paths across 
> the domain.
> 
> Igor