The MPLS WG Archive

[Edward Harrison <eph@dataconnection.com>]

Thanks Alan,

I'm still a bit confused, though.

The message flow in figure 8 seems to show that node E is subordinate to
node B (as the signaling for the pruning flows from B to E and not D to E).
Moreover, I thought that as the nodes A, B and D all have the subtree-id of
2 in the TERO, they were part of the same sub-tree.  If E is subordinate to
D, shouldn't D have a subtree-ID of 2 and B have a subtree-id of 1?

Answering my confusion another way, maybe you could clarify what the tree
looks like for the modified TERO in example 6.1
{A(0,2),B(1,2),C(1,1),D(1,1),E(2,2),F(3,2),G(3,2)}?

Does the new

     E
     |
   +---+
   |   |
   F   G

subtree hang from node D (as this is where it appears in the TERO) or node B
(as this is the node with the same subtree ID and is where the signaling
flow seems to go in figure 6)?

Thanks,

Ed

-----Original Message-----
From: Kullberg, Alan [mailto:akullber@netplane.com]
Sent: 08 April 2003 18:34
To: Edward Harrison; Nippon - Seisho Yasukawa
Cc: mpls@UU.NET
Subject: RE: Clarification on draft-yasukawa-mpls-rsvp-p2mp-01.txt


Ed,

I believe that the TEROs as shown in the document are correct.
In the modified TERO {A(0,2),B(1,2),C(1,1),D(1,1),E(2,2),H(3,1)},
notice that E is at level 2 and is subordinate to D at level 1
since D is the most recent node at level 1 encountered when
parsing the TERO from left to right.

Hope this helps.

Alan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Edward Harrison [mailto:eph@dataconnection.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2003 11:20 AM
> To: Nippon - Seisho Yasukawa
> Cc: mpls@UU.NET
> Subject: Clarification on draft-yasukawa-mpls-rsvp-p2mp-01.txt
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I have one small question on draft-yasukawa-mpls-rsvp-p2mp-01.txt.
> 
> Can you confirm whether the Original and Modified TEROs in section 6.3
> (sender initiated pruning) are correct?
> 
> From section 4.6.1.1, I would expect the original TERO
> {A(0,1),B(1,1),C(1,1),D(1,1),E(2,1),F(3,1),G(3,1),H(3,1)} to 
> correspond to
> the following tree:
> 
>        A
>        |
>     +--+--+
>     |  |  |
>     B  C  D
>           |
>           E
>           |
>        +--+--+
>        |  |  |
>        F  G  H
> 
> However, from the example in 6.1, I would expect the modified TERO
> {A(0,2),B(1,2),C(1,1),D(1,1),E(2,2),H(3,1)} to correspond to:
> 
>        A
>        |
>     +--+--+
>     |  |  |
>     B  C  D
>     |
>     E
>     |
>     H
> 
> Have I missed something, or should the original TERO for this example
> actually be {A(0,1),B(1,1),E(2,1),F(3,1),G(3,1),H(3,1),C(1,1),D(1,1)},
> corresponding to:
> 
>        A
>        |
>     +--+--+
>     |  |  |
>     B  C  D
>     |
>     E
>     |
>  +--+--+
>  |  |  |
>  F  G  H
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Ed
>