Re: [mpls-tp] MPLS-TP LSP questions

David Allan I <david.i.allan@ericsson.com> Wed, 02 March 2011 00:04 UTC

From: David Allan I <david.i.allan@ericsson.com>
To: Velan S <velantechie@gmail.com>, "mpls-tp@ietf.org" <mpls-tp@ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 19:04:50 -0500
Thread-Topic: [mpls-tp] MPLS-TP LSP questions
Thread-Index: AcvX3P8picTAiMt0Rl6pq3vCIn+dsgAj/Y2Q
Message-ID: <60C093A41B5E45409A19D42CF7786DFD51CFB47441@EUSAACMS0703.eamcs.ericsson.se>
References: <AANLkTikqgFVrFaOp1Q4P0vKm9F1pZu+VC54NFj-P_zMT@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikqgFVrFaOp1Q4P0vKm9F1pZu+VC54NFj-P_zMT@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_60C093A41B5E45409A19D42CF7786DFD51CFB47441EUSAACMS0703e_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [mpls-tp] MPLS-TP LSP questions
Precedence: list

HI:

First I beleive it is safe to assume both TP and traditional LSPs will exist in an LSR.
If no OAM messages are running on one of the LSPs, a mis-merge cannot be detected.

If OAM is run on both what a node would see is an "unexpected encapsulation". See section 3.5.2 of the CC-CV-RDI draft...

I hope that helps
Dave



________________________________
From: mpls-tp-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-tp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Velan S
Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 10:49 PM
To: mpls-tp@ietf.org
Subject: [mpls-tp] MPLS-TP LSP questions

Hi Experts,

I quickly wanted to check with you all,

Can both,  MPLS-TP LSP and traditional MPLS LSP, exist in a LSR?  If both can exist, there is possibility of merging of these LSPs at a LSR.  How can we detect such merging LSPs?

Thanks in advance.
S.Velan

[mpls-tp] MPLS-TP LSP questions Velan S
Re: [mpls-tp] MPLS-TP LSP questions neil.2.harrison
Re: [mpls-tp] MPLS-TP LSP questions David Allan I
Re: [mpls-tp] MPLS-TP LSP questions Velan S