The hop-limit constraint is defined as follows in
draft-ietf-mpls-rsvp-lsp-fastreroute-00.txt:
Hop-limit
The maximum number of extra hops the backup path is allowed
to take, from current node (a PLR) to a MP, with PLR and MP
excluded in counting. For example, hop-limit of 0 means only
direct links between PLR and MP can be considered.
I assume that the MP here refers to the MP where backup tunnels rejoin
the path of the protected LSP, not the Detour Merge Point, which is defined
in the same document as:
MP - Merge Point. The LSR where one or more backup tunnels rejoin
the path of the protected LSP, downstream of the potential
failure. In the case of one-to-one backup, a Merge Point may
also be an LSR where multiple detours converge and only one
detour is signaled beyond that LSR; this type of merge point
may be referred to as a Detour Merge Point. A MP may also
be a PLR.
Seems to me that an assumption is made here that every node
on the downstream path of the protected LSP should/must be a MP. Otherwise
if some of the nodes are MP and some are not capable of merging LSPs, and a
PLR that computes a detour path has no knowledge of which one is a MP (this
info. is not flooded by ospf/is-is), how could the hop-limit constraint be
applied?
If the above assumption is valid, should the destination of the detour LSP
be
the MP, rather than the final destination of the protected LSP?
Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Ling Li
Axiowave Networks, Inc.
200 Nickerson Road
Marlborough, MA 01752
========================
|
Try Searching:
servers, voip, java, networking, microsoft ...
|
|
|
|