[c-nsp] RFC4090 and Implementation in Cisco

[Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer)]

>>> 
>>
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios120/120newft
>> /120limit/120s/120s22/s_ipevdp.htm
>>> I would say that MPLS/TE is not supported.  I would think there is a
>>> need for some RSVP hooks in that scenario.
>> 
>> Not sure there is. If IP event dampening holds the lineprotocol down
>> (i.e. when the penalty accumulated is too high), ISIS/OSPF will not
>> get notified, so the headend will not reoptimize (if it is
>> configured to do so). 
>> 
> 
> Therein lies the rub.  It is not interface dampening but rather IP
> event dampening.  So the line protocol of the interface is not held
> down but rather the routing protocols are notified so that *they* can
consider
> the interface down for the purposes of adjacency formation, route
> advertisement, and forwarding.  That's why there is a supported
> protocol list. 

you're right, I didn't describe it correctly. but my point is still
valid: ISIS/OSPF won't advertise this prefix/adjacency, so the headend
will not use this link in its CSPF calculation.

	oli