The MPLS-OPS Archive[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index] Re: TE Deployment
On Jan 23, 2005, at 5:58 AM, Puddinhead Wilson wrote: > Unless it can be done without label stacking,it seems > to me that it is pointless persuing this. you just have the regular additional label for RSVP-TE, this is all. JP. > You would run into MTU issues as you keep stacking > unecmp/ecmp inside unecmp, nested LSPs. > > I would request someone on the mailing list to please > find a solution to Label stacking and reduce the > nightmare on network provisioning before persuing > these ideas. > > --- Neil Fernandes <neil_fernandok@hotmail.com> > wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I have some questions on TE deplpyment on Cisco >> equipment..I am trying to >> understand on whether un-equal cost load-balancing >> is possible when using >> multiple TE tunnels between "P" routers. If so how >> does the load >> distribution happen. My question is, If I have two >> paths with un-equal costs >> from source A to Source B, Can I achieve un-equal >> cost load-balancing and >> also is it possible to control to traffic >> distribution ratios?..Can I use >> "auto-route-announce" for achieving the same..Some >> sample configs will be of >> great help... >> >> TIA >> >> Neil >> >> > > > > > > ___________________________________________________________ > ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! > http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com > > ------- > 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
|
|