The MPLS WG Archive[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-pan-lsp-ping-00.txt]
Hi All, I'm glad that mpls guys think LSP condition check and failure detect is neccesary feature. Because, I'v described it as LSP-keepalive in draft-satoru-mpls-1hop-lsp-00.txt. Keepalive is a proactive failure detecting method for some data-link, routing-protocol and session. It is also needed for LSP because of the LSR can feedback LSP condition to routing/forwarding autonomic decision. I think it is need to consider in this working group. -- Satoru Matsushima From: George Swallow <swallow@cisco.com> Subject: Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-pan-lsp-ping-00.txt] Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 11:26:46 -0400 > > George> The mechanism is intentionally tied to the control plane to ensure > > George> that the source is properly informed even if the reverse data path > > George> may be broken. > > > > If the reply is encapsulated in a UDP packet which is addressed to the > > tunnel head and has router alert set, isn't this just as effective, without > > the dependence on the control plane? > > Interesting idea. We should explore this. > > ...George > > > ================================================================== > George Swallow Cisco Systems (978) 244-8143 > 250 Apollo Drive > Chelmsford, Ma 01824 > >
|
|