Support.

Russ

On 5/31/2012 6:24 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> Alia, Alvaro,
> 
> I support adoption.
> 
> As requested, below some (quickly written) opinions:
> 
> Positive:
> ++ Incremental deployment with incremental benefits.
> (Eventually some focused deployments may be enough to solve the main LFA 
> limitations.)
> + Relatively easy understanding (and possibly control) for the network 
> operator of the path taken by the traffic. Useful for capacity planning, 
> network manageability and respect of design rules (e.g. don't use a PE to 
> backup a P)
> + Relative simplicity
> + Can provide 100% coverage in some real networks. (at least one I am aware 
> of)
> 
> 
> Negative:
> - "esthetic": some "random" (from human design perspective) mesh of control 
> plane sessions. May have an impact on the management/monitoring. (e.g. how 
> many T-LDP sessions am I supposed on have on node XT6 ? Is one missing?).
> - lacks 100% guaranteed coverage. Could eventually be worked on (e.g. 
> studies, addition of (virtual TE) links) but requires work :-)
> 
> 
> Positive definitely outweighs the negative.
> IMHO will be deployed, with or without the IETF. I would prefer with the IETF 
> review and standardization.
> 
> Regards,
> Bruno
> 
>>From Alia Atlas >Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2012 6:59 PM
>> Subject: opinions on adoption of draft-shand-remote-lfa as a WG draft
>>
>> draft-shand-remote-lfa was presented favorably this last IETF.  There
>> is known IPR
>> associated with it on file ( https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1770/ )
>> This draft presents
>> a solution for IP/LDP fast-reroute that does not guarantee 100%
>> coverage but can substantially
>> improve coverage over LFAs.
>>
>> We would like to initiate a WG poll to determine whether to adopt
>> draft-shand-remote-lfa.
>> We are, of course, interested in opinions and reasoning rather than
>> simple yes/no.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Alia
>> _______________________________________________
>> rtgwg mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
> 
> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
> 
> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
> confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu 
> ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
> electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
> France Telecom - Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete 
> altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
> 
> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
> information that may be protected by law;
> they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
> this message and its attachments.
> As emails may be altered, France Telecom - Orange is not liable for messages 
> that have been modified, changed or falsified.
> Thank you.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rtgwg mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg

-- 
<><
[email protected]
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg

Reply via email to