Subject: RSVP-TE: resource class affinity & route-pinning

From: "Zhang, Jeffrey" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999 10:04:01 -0400

Hi,

Unlike CR-LDP, RSVP-TE does not seem to pass resource class affinity and
route-pinning request. Were they considered at all?

At least the resource class affinity attribute of the LSP tunnel would be
useful when passed along the path - if a downstream node needs/wants to do a
path calculation, it may need to use that to qualify links.

Thanks.

Jeffrey

---

From: Tony Li <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 02 Oct 1999 00:50:21 -0700

> route-pinning request. Were they considered at all?

Yes, they were.

> path calculation, it may need to use that to qualify links.

I agree that there is some reasonable argument for affinity for use with fast
reroute.  However, I suspect that we need to get fast reroute deployed and get
some experience with it to see if this is a serious requirement instead of undue
complexity.

I don't understand any argument for a route-pinning request.  A pinned route or
an unpinned route can be explicitly codified as part of the explicit route.

Tony