The MPLS WG Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS WG Archive>month:2001-Jul> msg00355



[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]

  • From: Ravi Shekhar <ravi_shekhar007@yahoo.com>
  • Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 10:01:38 -0700 (PDT)
  • Cc: mpls-list <mpls@UU.NET>

Ping,

> >   But is that really such a big win in the long run? 
> 
> Yes.

  Why?

> 
> > If we are tracing LSP to an
> >   LSR(which could be one of these inetwork LSRs) and if we 
> dont recieve a
> >   response from it, it could either be because LSP is down 
> or the LSR does not
> >   implement LSP-ping.
> 
> In the draft, it said, "... Before initiating the liveliness test, the
> user must make sure that both ingress and egress LSR can support the
> LSR-ping."

 
  I read that and it doesnt seem to be a very valid assumption.

> 
> >  How do you know to distinguish between these two?
> >   And if you cant, then indirectly it implies that LSP-ping 
> be implemented
> >   on all such routers and I think practically thats what 
> will end up happening.
> >   Whichever ping mechanism is used, we will end up having 
> to support it on all
> >   the routers.
> > 
> 
> Now you start to scare me. :-) 

  Mission accomplished..;)..

  - Ravi Shekhar. 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/