Re: [mpls] RMR updates

[Huub van Helvoort <[e-mail]>]

Hello Kireeti,

You wrote:

We'd like to move to last call on the RMR document, but first there are a couple of loose ends we'd like to tie up, specifically, the "Advanced topics" in the -05 version of the draft.

a) how should the RMR document deal with "half-rings"?

Consider the following half-ring:

    A    B

    |    |

    C----D

To me this is the same as a linear topology:
A--C--D--B

A ring topology is a closed loop.

Here are some options:

i) the RMR document shouldn't concern itself with this case

yes, because it is not a ring

ii) create a PW from A to B to complete the ring

no, closing the ring should be at lower layers

ii) instead of creating N LSPs (in this case 4), only create LSPs from A to B and from B to A.

maybe, but with the requirement that these two LSPs shall not pass
through nodes C and D to avoid single points of failure

b) how should the RMR document deal with protecting hub nodes?

they should be considered to be "normal" ring nodes and protected as such

i) not deal with it.

no

ii) use technology akin to PIC edge

I am not familiar with this.

We feel that it is important to address both these issues. We are soliciting your response, either among the options suggested, or potentially other ideas.

My 0.02€

Best regards, Huub.

-- 
================================================================
Always remember that you are unique...just like everyone else...