Re: [mpls] Fast Reroute for Node Protection in LDP-based LSPs

> On Dec 9, 2016, at 8:15 PM, Santosh Esale <sesale@juniper.net> wrote:
> 
> Hi Stefano,
>           The main purpose of the solution is to provide
> topology independent local protection using RSVP-TE in widely
> deployed LDP based MPLS networks. Link protection is already
> deployed using manually configured RSVP-TE one-hop LSPs. This
> draft addresses node protection.
> 
> 
> Now, the solution can also be used to protect segment routing
> hop-by-hop node segments and we would add a note about it.
> Of course, the other solution that you mentioned may fit
> segment-routing too.

My point is that if you have SR in your network, it doesn’t make much sense to use an RSVP or LDP based solution.

Thanks.
s.

> 
> Thanks,
> Santosh
> On 12/7/16, 1:30 AM, "Stefano Previdi (sprevidi)" <sprevidi@cisco.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> 
>>> On Dec 6, 2016, at 11:55 PM, Santosh Esale <sesale@juniper.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Hannes,
>>>         Good point! We will generalize the solution to cover
>>> segment-routing (SR) too in the next - 05 revision.
>> 
>> 
>> I don’t think your solution brings anything better than what already
>> covered in ti-lfa draft for segment-routing. See
>> draft-francois-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa-02.
>> 
>> s.
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Santosh
>>> 
>>> On 12/6/16, 3:17 AM, "Hannes Gredler" <hannes@gredler.at> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> hi santosh,
>>>> 
>>>> just curious why the proposed solution is constrained to only use LDP ?
>>>> 
>>>> IMO what you have suggested here would just fit nicely for protecting
>>>> segment-routing node labels as well. segment routing node-labels are
>>>> "calculated" in a similar fashion than LDP labels as such my guess
>>>> would
>>>> be that this solution applies to SR node labels as well.
>>>> 
>>>> suggest to generalize it to:
>>>> "Fast Reroute for Node Protection in hop-by-hop based LSPs"
>>>> 
>>>> thanks,
>>>> 
>>>> /hannes
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 12/5/16 20:59, Santosh Esale wrote:
>>>>> Hello Everyone,
>>>>>                          We have presented the draft
>>>>> - draft-esale-mpls-ldp-node-frr – in
>>>>> MPLS working group in three IETF meetings including the latest one at
>>>>> Seul. 
>>>>> However, as the draft is of interest to routing working too, we are
>>>>> initiating this
>>>>> thread to solicit feedbacks from the routing working group. Please let
>>>>> us know
>>>>> your comments.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Presentations -
>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/93/slides/slides-93-mpls-3.pdf
>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/94/slides/slides-94-mpls-3.pptx
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/97/slides/slides-97-mpls-08-ti-frr-iet
>>>>> f-
>>>>> 97-00.pptx
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Santosh (on behalf of authors)
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> rtgwg mailing list
>>>>> rtgwg@ietf.org
>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
>>>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rtgwg mailing list
>>> rtgwg@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
>> 
> 
> 