Re: [Idr] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-bashandy-bgp-frr-vector-label-00.txt

[Robert Raszuk <[e-mail]>]

Hi Ahmed,

Since you seem to be skipping answering some questions in your replies 
let me ask (well repeat) one question at a time.

Question:

How are you going to propagate any information in iBGP from repair PEs 
to ingress PEs considering that overall best path for this prefix is 
advertised by some other protected PE ?

Are you mandating that your solution is deployable only with use of one 
of the following techniques:

- add-paths on rPEs, RRs & iPEs
- best-external on rPEs + add-paths on RRs & iPEs
- best-external on rPEs + diverse-path on RRs
- full mesh of iPEs & rPEs with best external

(I am skipping cluster external option on RRs as in the control plane 
only RRs which are randomly located this may be a bit difficult to 
provision).

Scenario clarification:

I am talking about case where pPE chooses the best path based on local 
preference or MED.

The only comment I found related to the above is in the introduction:

    In modern networks, it is not uncommon to have a prefix reachable
    via multiple edge routers. One example is the best external path
    [8].

The reason for such fundamental question is that architectures which do 
not require at the service level participation of ingress routers and 
repair routers in the protection may be chosen over the one which does 
(your proposal).

Rgs,
R.