Subject: Assigning common Label in RSVP-TE

From: Manoj Agiwal <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:05:28 +0530

Hi ,
   draft-ietf-mpls-rsvp-lsp-tunnel-08.txt talks about sharing the common 
   label across LSPs which are shared explicit.

    What are the advantages one get on assigning a common label ?
    Are there any other advantages apart from conserving the label
    space .

    Why we not share common labels across the Explicitlt Routed LSPs ?

    Why there is a requirement to make sure if Path messages have identical
    Explicit Route Objects ?

    I am including the lines from the draft which talks about assigning
    common label to LSPs .

   "If a node receives a Resv message that has assigned the same label
   value to multiple senders, then that node MAY also assign a single
   value to those same senders or to any subset of those senders.  Note
   that if a node intends to police individual senders to a session, it
   MUST assign unique labels to those senders."

   "SE style reservations can be provided using multipoint-to-point
   label-switched-path or LSP per sender.  Multipoint-to-point LSPs may
   be used when path messages do not carry the EXPLICIT_ROUTE object, or
   when Path messages have identical EXPLICIT_ROUTE objects.  In either
   of these cases a common label may be assigned."

Regards ,
Manoj