[c-nsp] P2MP MPLS TE

[Mark Tinka]

On Tuesday, September 20, 2011 05:34:34 AM Pavel Lunin 
wrote:

> > What's wrong with PIM?
> 
> http://books.google.com/books?id=2lxbaQ-VN8sC&lpg=PP1&hl=
> ru&pg=PA307#v=onepage&q&f=false:)

Exactly!

Don't get me wrong, PIM is still used in NG-MVPN networks, 
but only at the edges, i.e., at the Sender PE router when 
communicating with the source network, and at the Receiver 
PE router toward the FTTH network (as part of the IGMP 
infrastructure).

> Let me guys ask a reverse question. Is anyone here using
> draft-rosen in production? Would appreciate you
> feedback. Is it as dreadful as it's sometimes said? :)
> Mark?

Nope, no Rosen here :-).

I studied it many times back and found it too complicated 
that we never deployed it. It helped that there wasn't any 
urgent need for it at the time to. 

It so happened that when we then wanted to implement 
Multicast, NG-MVPN was available.

Does replacing PIM with BGP add complexity in BGP? Perhaps. 
But from our experience over the years running NG-MVPN, it's 
actually not causing any major issues.

Cheers,

Mark.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/attachments/20110920/1eb64b70/attachment.pgp>