[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Thanks for the feedback I would like to work with you to capture the
Virtual Link Mode into the draft.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 5:32 AM
> I believe this is a very useful draft. The described blocking
> problem (a limited ability of a node to cross-connect
> resources on input and output links wrt a particular LSP)
> exists not only in the Virtual Node scenario: there could be
> "real" network elements experiencing the problem (perhaps,
> because of the hardware limitations). Hence there is a need
> for a routing controller to be capable to advertise a map of
> acceptable (or
> unacceptable) input-output link combinations, and for a path
> computer to account for such a constraint (which is not trivial).
> I also would suggest the authors to consider the Virtual Link
> mode, that is, representing the domain to the outside world
> as a bunch of PEs interconnected by abstract (virtual) links.
> This approach may require more advertisements compared to the
> Virtual Node mode; however, it does relieve external path
> computers from handling the interface maps, plus it gives the
> idea about the cost and attributes of feasible paths across
> the domain.