[c-nsp] MPLS down to the CPE

Adam Vitkovsky adam.vitkovsky at swan.sk
Tue Jul 9 07:30:02 EDT 2013

It very much appears they used IGP to propagate labels, they are just called
Looks like it's using the same computations as rLFA in order to build the
tunnel towards the protection node. 
Now with this and routing-header in IPv6 do we really need LDP for IPv6
(other than the targeted LDP sessions)? 
I'd like to play with this

-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Saku
Sent: Monday, July 08, 2013 5:32 PM
To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS down to the CPE

On (2013-07-08 17:14 +0200), Mark Tinka wrote:

> We, at the time, opted to wait for IP LFA since RSVP-TE in the Access 
> (even just to the adjacent PE routers) just didn't look 
> administratively feasible, let alone scale :-).

Even tLDP needed for rLFA is less than desirable, additional states
seemingly arbitrarily signalled up and down.  Segment routing[0] provides
100% coverage for LFA like functionality without any additional signalling
between the devices.


EFT program exists for IOS-XR/ASR9k at least.
cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

More information about the cisco-nsp mailing list