[c-nsp] Traffic Engineering considers bad ?

[J. Oquendo]

Jared Mauch wrote:
> 	With an feature, there are and could be a universe of bugs
> to explore.  I think the better question is 'Why do I need MPLS and/or TE'.
>
> 	where is the real value to me?
>
> 	MPLS-TE is a tool that can be used to solve some problems.  If
> you don't have any of these problems, it can create troubles for you if
> you don't know how to manage it properly.  An example would be that if
> you enable ECMP across 2 paths, set up a TE tunnel over it, "why is my
> one circuit all full and the other empty?".  Well, the lsp picks the first
> path (with addl caveats).  You may need two TE tunnels to do the balancing
> at one side of the network.  Maybe you don't need TE on that path?
>
>   

Also noteworthy is the differentiation of protection against failures,
One-to-One, Facility Backups, what the DMP (detour merge point), etc.

 > I am not qualified enough to argue with you, but i know that no vendor
 > will ever mention in their website what they dont support or what they
 > dont recommend because it will lead to problems later, i am just simply
 > wondering if any part of this is true.

I'm lost, did you mean vendors as in equipment vendors or the NSP portion
of it. I would think equipment vendors would sell you a rainbow to go with
that supEngine, on the NSP side, I could see some vendors not wanting to
implement it for whatever reason they'd choose.

-- 
====================================================
J. Oquendo
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x1383A743
sil . infiltrated @ net http://www.infiltrated.net 

The happiness of society is the end of government.
John Adams

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 5157 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/attachments/20070314/245d4a85/attachment.bin