The MPLS-OPS Archive[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index] RE: Reasons to deploy MPLS-TE
> I agree BGP forwards only 1 route, yet how would you say FRR is slower? I would not. I would expect that in most cases FRR would be slightly faster than a well-tuned IGP, which again would be faster than BGP. > take this case of how it wokrs in LDP/OSPF > 1. we wait for an LSP to down to be detected > 2. we then use new LSP after detection and using the protocol's database to see alternate route to node after receiving the "tigger". > > Incase of BGP it would be: > 1. VPNv4 route withdrawn, and hence the BGP update propgates a new route immediately after running decision making alogirhtm (implicit withdraw et al ) > 2. this amounts to *almost* the same propogation delay as case 1 above...does it not? Not in my experience. YMMV. Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug@nethelp.no > > > > sthaug@nethelp.no wrote: > > If *FRR* is the biggest driver of TE, then that can be achieved by > > using BGP as an LDP also :) (or using any other LDP) as they would > > give us multiple LSPs to the same VPNv4 prefix :)?? Will they not? > > The point of FRR, as I understand it, is mainly to let you reroute to > a predefined path in the seconds before your normal IGP converges to > a new path. I don't see how BGP can help you there - remember a BGP > speaker will only announce *one* best path to other BGP speakers. > > Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug@nethelp.no > > --------------------------------- > Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download Messenger Now ------- The MPLS-OPS Mailing List Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://www.mplsrc.com/mplsops.shtml Archive: http://www.mplsrc.com/mpls-ops_archive.shtml
|
|