[cisco-voip] Redundancy -- Quality of Voice -- QoS vs RSVP

[Scott Voll]

Correct..... because your routing over A and not B..... Now if A fails then
your now routing over B and the same thing would be true.  if B has
bandwidth then great if no, then fail.

This was exactly what I was looking for.  A way to still do CAC but have
redundant links for possible network failures.

Scott

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Robert Kulagowski <rkulagow at gmail.com>wrote:

> Blind-leading-the-blind here, but when I looked at RSVP it was still
> built over the underlying routing protocols.  If there are two links
> into Site B, RSVP is still going to say, "OK, there's a path to Site B
> over link A".  "Does Link A have bandwidth?"  If yes, great.  If no,
> then the call "fails", even if there was bandwidth available on Link
> B.
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20110624/89c5d586/attachment.html>