[c-nsp] Devil's Advocate - Segment Routing, Why?

[Mark Tinka]

On 19/Jun/20 13:11, Robert Raszuk wrote:
>
> > For us, the PTX1000/10002 make absolute sense, and are options we are
>
> If you ever need some TE in your network just make sure it can run
> SR-MPLS (segment endpoint functions) as it turns out that sweet spots
> for flow engineering is very often in forcing it to traverse some
> specific core boxes.

In 2015, we had a customer that wanted EoMPLS services that simulated
EoDWDM behaviour, i.e., if the path failed, don't automatically
re-route, which is what LDP does by default.

So, reluctantly, we built a bunch of RSVP-TE tunnels, but only because
it was short-term, the money was great, and there was a migration path
toward EoDWDM.

As soon as they migrated, we ditched RSVP. All our network runs only on
LDP. I can't stand RSVP :-).

Granted, SR-TE is meant to be a lot more hassle-free than RSVP-TE was,
but I still wouldn't do it, as I can throw bandwidth at the problem.

At a previous job, we ran p2mp RSVP-TE to deliver IPTV Multicast in
NG-MVPN infrastructure. We'd began testing our migration to p2mp mLDP,
so we can dump RSVP, but then I had to bail and move on.

Mark.