Subject: RE: Issues with switchover from I-PMSI to S-PMSI (Multicast inMPLS/BGP IP VPNs)

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 11:27:37 +0800

Hi,
This is more likely an implementation issue for root PE, and will not 
cause interoperability issue.
Anyway, from my point, root PE will wait for sufficient time to initiate 
RSVP-TE P2MP LSP to get enough leaf A-D routes, then turn on the swithover 
timer. If the case as described below does happen, when the timer expires, 
root PE will switchover to S-PMSI anyway.

BR
Lizhong

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 09:11:13 -0700
From: Richard Li <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Issues with switchover from I-PMSI to S-PMSI (Multicast
                 inMPLS/BGP              IP VPNs)
To: [email-masked]
Cc: 'Yakov Rekhter' <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

I meant that the S-PMSI LSP is already set up, but the switchover from
I-PMSI to S-PMSI has not happened.  The data is being sent out on I-PMSI.
According to the original spec, a switchover timer is fired. But before 
the
expires, a new Leaf A-D is received. Now the root wants to add the new 
leaf
to S-PMSI. Now the root is faced with two choices: (1) when the timer
expires, it switches over to S-PMSI and (2) It waits until the new
S2L-Sub-LSP is completed and starts a new timer. 

It looks the spec is not clear about the above situation.

-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Rosen [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2010 7:44 AM
To: [email-masked]
Cc: 'Yakov Rekhter'; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Issues with switchover from I-PMSI to S-PMSI (Multicast
inMPLS/BGP IP VPNs)

> Suppose that RSVP-TE P2MP LSP is already set up, and a new receiver PE 
> wants to join it by sending a Type 4 (Leaf A-D) route to the sender PE
> (root) in response to a previously received "Leaf Info Required".

If the P2MP is already set up, then it is likely that data is already 
being
sent on it.  If a new receiver cannot be added to the LSP, then that new
receiver is not going to be able to get the data at all.

> Now the question is: Should the root (sender PE) wait until the sub 
> LSP is set up before it issues the required control plane information 
> to signal that the specified C-flow is now bound to that p2mp LSP?

For this question to apply, the new receiver would have to join during the
interval between (a) the LSP gets successfully set up to the previous set 
of
receivers, and (b) the S-PMSI A-D route is sent.  I don't think this case 
is
worth worrying about.

--------------------------------------------------------
ZTE Information Security Notice: The information contained in this mail is solely property of the sender's organization. This mail communication is confidential. Recipients named above are obligated to maintain secrecy and are not permitted to disclose the contents of this communication to others.
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the originator of the message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender.
This message has been scanned for viruses and Spam by ZTE Anti-Spam system.