Subject: Reg. MPLS-RSVP LSP Tunnels...

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 18:18:38 -0800

Hi Pramoda,

> Agreed that you can aggregate the two dataflows onto the same LSP, based
on
> the reservation style.
> The point was that if the RSVP PATH/RESV messages (for the microflow) are
> processed at each hop along the path, you could be reserving resources
> twice - once when you set up the LSP and again due to the microflow
> RSVP messages.
> (Note that the reservations for the LSP would anyway be periodically
> refreshed by the ingress LER1.)

If the LSP_TUNNEL session object specifies the same Tunnel ID and the SE
reservation style is used for the tunnel, then there should not be issue of
double-booking of bandwidth.  The RSVP tunnel rerouting mechansim depends
on this and the LSP ID in the sender template to effect the
make-before-break rerouting of LSP.  You can refer to section 2.5 of
draft-ietf-mpls-rsvp-lsp-tunnel-06.txt for details.

Rgds
- Kheng Kok