ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Datagram? Packet? (was : APEX)

2002-09-28 20:07:52
On Sun, 29 Sep 2002 10:11:13 +0859, Masataka Ohta said:
In this thread, as Noel said:
: It's easy to imagine an ATM-like system
: in which circuit ID's are global in scope.

the circuit ID does not neccessarily imply special routing.

If you're not routing based on circuit ID, why are you bothering to have one?

However, you should also be aware that RSVP is virtually useless
without QoS routing.

Yes, a protocol to tweak the control of an underlying XYZ is pretty useless
if there isn't an XYZ to tweak...

You're overlooking the basic distinction between a circuit and RSVP - if
something happens along the way to break the previously established circuit,
the circuit is *BROKEN*, and nothing moves until it is either re-established or
re-negotiated. You might want to re-read RFC2205, section 2.3, and ask yourself
what happens to packets in the time between BGP selecting a new route and the
next RSVP refresh packet arriving.  I don't think it includes "send back an
ICMP Host Unreachable even if there's a new route"....

-- 
                                Valdis Kletnieks
                                Computer Systems Senior Engineer
                                Virginia Tech

Attachment: pgpsqA936WUdY.pgp
Description: PGP signature

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>