Re: ClassType object for Signalling? Routing? Neither?

[Nabil Seddigh <nseddigh@tropicnetworks.com>]

Jim Boyle wrote:
> But the Setup/Hold could now be the Setup/Hold TEClasses.
> 

Interesting idea but I think we would want to stay away from 
redefining the setup/hold priorities as not all MPLS networks
necessarily want to do TE.

> Here are some of the issues I have with the classtype object 
> in signaling. but most concerning...
> 
> -) You can get in a situation where a transit node doesn't 
> recognize the class type object and rejects the path message.  
> What is the head end to

Is the intention to allow the CT object to pass through such
nodes without being rejected? i.e to signal through the legacy
part of the network? If so, RSVP allows this. If IANA assigns
a class-num greater than C0 for the Class-Type object then 
nodes that don't recognize it will simply forward it thru.

---
Best,
Nabil Seddigh
nseddigh@tropicnetworks.com