The MPLS-OPS Archive

["Carlos Patriawan" <carlos@carlos.net>]

>
> > Reg the SLA :
> >
> > May be It worth if Robert could state what is the problem ie: what are
the
> > reason given by CSCO.
> >
> > Also , Why U see no issue with SLA ??
> > Ex: How U get notified that the transport LSP is down ?
> >      How U get notified that an interworking LSP in one direction is
> > withdrawn ??

This is depends on vendor implementation.

If such vendor can support either RSVP or LDP as transport lsp,
the best deployment rules would be using RSVP-TE LSP whenever possible
and LDP LSP as backup LSP.This is applies to both
Martini and VPLS (or any other draft that needs transport lsp).

This way virtually transport LSP will never go down
(except of course,if the egress/other PE is down).

Also read www.vpls.org

thanks,


Carlos

> >      What tool/command are available to check ,guess the LSP PING but it
is
> > not automated ??
>
> Yes, these are important issues - but are they much more difficult to
> handle for VPLS than for Ethernet over MPLS (point to point) and similar
> technologies? This is not obvious to me.
>
> Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug@nethelp.no
>
> -------
> The MPLS-OPS Mailing List
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:  http://www.mplsrc.com/mplsops.shtml
> Archive: http://www.mplsrc.com/mpls-ops_archive.shtml
>

-------
The MPLS-OPS Mailing List
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:  http://www.mplsrc.com/mplsops.shtml
Archive: http://www.mplsrc.com/mpls-ops_archive.shtml