Re: [PCN] RSVP and ECMP

Hi Martin,

yes you are right, but this is a different issue. The question is: how 
is it achieved that RSVP PATH messages are routed on the same path as 
subsequent data packets in the presence of ECMP?

Regards,

    Michael

Martin Karsten wrote:
> I'm not sure what's done in reality (if at all), but RSVP PATH messages
> have the 'router alert' flag set, so in theory they are processed
> differently from a regular IP packet anyway.
>
> Greetings,
> Martin
>
> Michael Menth wrote:
>   
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've got a question regarding RSVP. PATH messages need to be carried
>> over the same path as subsequent data packets. How is this achieved in
>> the presence of ECMP routing? In theory, PATH messages can take a
>> different route than data packets if the load balancer takes arbitrary
>> parts of the header(s) to calculate a suitable hash value, which decides
>> which route the packet will take.
>>
>> This issue seems to be related to the problem of how to make sure that
>> PCN probe messages take the same path as subsequent PCN data packets,
>> provided that they have the same source and destination ports and
>> addresses.
>>
>> I am interested in how this problem is solved in practice or whether it
>> is intentionally avoided.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>    Michael
>>
>>     
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PCN mailing list
> PCN@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcn
>   

-- 
Dr. Michael Menth, Assistant Professor
University of Wuerzburg, Institute of Computer Science
Am Hubland, D-97074 Wuerzburg, Germany, room B206
phone: (+49)-931/888-6644, fax: (+49)-931/888-6632
mailto:menth@informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de
http://www3.informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de/research/ngn

_______________________________________________
PCN mailing list
PCN@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcn