[Teas] A clarification request for draft-ietf-teas-mpls-tp-rsvpte-ext-associated-lsp

["Rakesh Gandhi (rgandhi)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi WG,

Seeking input on the following clarification.


Original text in the draft for the single sided association LSP setup:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
   If REVERSE_LSP Object is not present in the received Path message of
the LSP, the egress node SHOULD use the LSP properties from the
   received LSP Path message to signal the LSP in the reverse direction
(which may depend on the local policy).


Issue with this text:
---------------------
Let's say, an ingress node signals the forward LSP with single sided
association type but without REVERSE_LSP object.
An egress node creates a reverse LSP using the objects from the Path
message of the forward LSP.
At the ingress node, this reverse LSP can in turn trigger to create
another reverse (well forward) LSP as a response.


Clarification:
--------------
Use the presence of REVERSE_LSP Object in the Path message of the forward
LSP as a trigger to create a reverse LSP on the egress node.
Egress node does not add it in the reverse LSP, so the ingress does not
trigger another reverse (well forward) LSP since REVERSE_LSP Object is not
present.


Welcome your inputs.

Thanks,
Rakesh




>The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-teas-mpls-tp-rsvpte-ext-associ
>ated-lsp/
>
>There's also a htmlized version available at:
>http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-teas-mpls-tp-rsvpte-ext-associated-l
>sp-03