[c-nsp] cisco MPLS AutoBandwidth Allocator

Peter Rathlev peter at rathlev.dk
Wed Sep 29 05:33:15 EDT 2010

On Wed, 2010-09-29 at 09:30 +0530, jack daniels wrote: 
> If you don't have overlapping TE tunnels ? what is meaning of this

If none of your MPLS TE LSPs use the same underlying links you will
never have any need for prioritisation, and thus never have any need for

An example: We (not ISP but enterprise) currently only use MPLS TE for
redundant L2 pseudowires that _have_ to use different paths in the
network. If we didn't use MPLS TE (in this case "explicit-path") we
would risk that two different pseudowires that were supposed to be a
redundant pair took the same path. In this case there's nothing to be
gained from AutoBandwidth.


More information about the cisco-nsp mailing list