[Teas] <draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te-scaling-rec> -- Open Thread

[Vishnu Pavan Beeram <[e-mail]>]

Folks, Hi!

There are a couple of comments on this draft that haven't been
responded-to/discussed on the list. I'm starting an open thread to see if
we can resolve them quickly and move the draft to the next stage.

(1) Should support for RI-RSVP functionality be signaled (via the HELLO
CAPABILITY object)?
-- Yes, this should be signaled.The RI-RSVP functionality must be activated
only between peers that indicate their support for this functionality. When
a node supports RI-RSVP, it couples the state of individual LSPs with the
state of the corresponding RSVP-TE signaling adjacency. In other words,
when an RI-RSVP capable node detects signaling adjacency failure, it would
act as if all the Path and Resv state learnt via the failed signaling
adjacency has timed out. This behavior should come into play only if it is
known that the neighbor also supports RI-RSVP.

(2) The document discusses two disparate techniques for cutting down the
amount of processing cycles required to maintain LSP state. Can we split
the document into two -- one for each technique?
-- Though the techniques are different, they are both employed to achieve
the same thing -- improve RSVP-TE control-plane scaling. We (the authors)
would prefer not to split the document unless the WG feels very strongly
about this.

If the WG is satisfied with these responses, then we would like to claim
that this draft is ready to be considered for WG LC.

Regards,
-Pavan (as a co-author)