The MPLS WG Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS WG Archive>month:2001-Apr> msg00537



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]  
  [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index]

Two signalling protocols (LDP & RSVP)

  • From: Eric Osborne <eosborne@cisco.com>
  • Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 16:47:56 -0400
  • Cc: asimha@cisco.com, eosborne@cisco.com, gluo@nortelnetworks.com, mgoel@hss.hns.com, mpls@UU.NET
  • User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
  • X-GPG-Fingerprint: 6412 0836 E440 B3EA 980C 4951 611E 1819 2E71 8562

On Fri, Apr 27, 2001 at 09:13:06AM -0700, Kireeti Kompella wrote:
> > Do you think the original question used "LDP" to mean "CR-LDP"?
> 
> I don't think so, but the previous poster switched subjects.  I
> agree completely, it makes perfect sense to run LDP and RSVP-TE
> on the same interfaces (depending on your applications), whereas
> running RSVP-TE and CR-LDP in the same network, let alone on the
> same interfaces, seems to be inviting gratuitous complexity.


Except in multi-vendor networks, where one vendor does RSVP and the
other does CR-LDP:


      C
     /
A---B 
     \
      D

If C does only CR-LDP and D does only RSVP, then A may need to do both 
RSVP and CR-LDP on the A<->B link.  This would not be the case if B
instead did some sort of RSVP<->CR-LDP translation, however.



eric