Subject: RE: draft-raggarwa-rsvpte-pw-01.txt

From: "Yaakov Stein" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 20:05:08 +0300

> Use the LDP to distribute the labels and establish the non-TE MS-PWs
and the RSVP-TE for distributing labels and establishing the TE MS-PWs.

> My question was why we should employ both LDP and RSVP-TE for TE
MS_PWs as you described in your mail (see below). 
> I did not mean to non-TE MS_PWs. For TE MS_PWs there is no use in
employing two protocols. 

Nurit, 

The question is whether to use, as you suggest, two different protocols
for PW label distribution
(i.e. LDP for some of the PWs, and RSVP-TE for others)
or whether to use the same label distribution protocol for all PWs, 
and to then run a second (different) protocol for resource reservation
for those PWs that need it.

I prefer not having to implement two different protocols for the
precisely the same function
(label distribution), but it is commonplace to run two or more different
protocols 
one after the other to perform distinct functions.

For example, when using LDP or RSVP-TE to set up MPLS LSPs, 
we first an IP routing protocol to find the topology, 
and afterwards the label distribution protocol to pin the LSP based on
that topology.

So applying your argument that only a single protocol should be used for

distinct sequential functions, would you suggest that we only allow BGP
setup of LSPs?

Y(J)S