Subject: looser ER and RSVP-TE

From: "Kainia Cloutier" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 08:32:12 -0800

My dear colleagues,

section 2.4 of the CR-LDP draft specifies the Route pinning TLV: loose
ERs are pinned down, upon establishment, to ensure they will not deviate
from their route in the event a better route becomes available.

I was always certain that RSVP-TE had addressed this. However, a recent
search in the RSVP-TE draft, showed me that route pinning is omitted. I
am extremely concerned about this. I have recently sent some e-mails to
my closest MPLS colleagues in other companies, and yes, it seems that
this issue is left to be vendor specific.

Could the authors of the RSVP-TE draft comment about this?

Best Regards,
Kainia Cloutier,
Alcatel.

---

From: George Swallow <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 10:46:44 -0500

Kainia -

This is one of the places where soft state works to your advantage.
In RSVP you can pin a route by.

1.  Sending a Path message with a loose source route and an RRO.

2.  Use the RRO to create a fully defined ERO.

3.  Refreseh the Path with that ERO.

...George

==================================================================
George Swallow       Cisco Systems                   (978) 244-8143
                     250 Apollo Drive
                     Chelmsford, Ma 01824

---

From: "madhukar khare" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 17:30:55 -0500

In route pinning, the path should not change if a better one is available.
This also then assumes that
the source would not change the ERO if an IGP advertised a better path-