On May 30, 2014, at 10:29 PM, Robert Raszuk wrote: [ … ] >> now my question is: would you bet the farm on that there won't >> be another episode (i.e. things we haven't considered so far). >> i won't, given that track record of misguided hopes and believes. > > I am not sure what's the point of that list. If you are stating that > with hop by hop LSP crafting you have more control - of course you are > rigth and no one will argue.
point is that LFA and opportunistic path-hunting technologies *always* have a gap, which was silently ignored up until it comes to deployment. boom reality check … i am having these 'episode' discussion since 4 years with some of my customers … always putting it off to the 'next release' is not something which was perceived well. > But do you need such fine art or you are ok with lighter and less > expensive alternatives. > > Frankly I like control plane based solutions vs data plane .. it is > just that perhaps we should more focus on making the former much > easier for operators then they are today. that and also striving for the right balance between control-plane and data-plane state. e.g. using automated-RSVP for setting up facility protection LSPs to all the next-next-hops uses the RSVP protocol in a range which is *far* away from scaling woes. one can then use SR label-blocks to get label bindings to the final destination points. - two MPLS labels (read: no fwd plane upgrade), 100% coverage. no excessive (T-LDP) sessions. app 30-50 RSVP sessions even on large scale networks. /hannes _______________________________________________ spring mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
