Hi Robert,

“Ok.. Note I would not do it that way, but I see what you mean. Changing paths 
of an RSVP-TE given LSP is really not a make-before-break operation. At least 
last time I checked into this space. “

<cb> More often than not LSP path change is make-before-break.  And especially 
in this scenario, care can be taken to ensure MBB.

--cb

From: Robert Raszuk <[email protected]>
Date: Saturday, August 2, 2025 at 7:16 PM
To: Tony Li <[email protected]>
Cc: Acee Lindem <[email protected]>, [email protected] 
<[email protected]>, LUIS MIGUEL CONTRERAS MURILLO 
<[email protected]>, Raul Arco (Nokia) 
<[email protected]>, Ron Bonica <[email protected]>, lsr <[email protected]>
Subject: [Lsr] Re: New Version Notification for 
draft-many-lsr-power-group-00.txt
Hi Tony,

Our goal is consolidation of paths, not LSPs.  Afterwards, you would still have 
two LSPs to the egress, but they would likely be routed on the same path.  By 
consolidating more LSPs onto fewer paths, there are hopefully links that are 
idle and can be put into power sleep mode.

Ok.. Note I would not do it that way, but I see what you mean. Changing paths 
of an RSVP-TE given LSP is really not a make-before-break operation. At least 
last time I checked into this space.

Moreover if we are really talking RSVP-TE I am not sure I would sign under 
design where two LSPs are traversing the same underlay path. It results in more 
periodic refreshes/signalling for no value.

We do not need interoperability.  Each head-end is free to perform their own 
path computations in any way that they see fit. In fact, this is key to 
incremental deployment.

I beg to differ on this one.

As such, we also do not need an architecture document.  This is not an 
architectural change.

And on this one as well.

Your real success depends on nodes in the domain playing the same song from the 
same notes.

I agree that shutting down a link is best done with some coordination, but the 
IGP is not the correct mechanism for doing this.  I disagree that shutting down 
any other infrastructure requires or benefits from any external mechanism.

Not sure if we are communicating here.

If shutting down the link or lc requires some central management station it 
does change the full design (perhaps simplifies it vastly) where all of the 
optimizations can be centrally managed perhaps to varying degrees.

Kind regards,
Robert

_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to