nanog mailing list archives
Re: Concerning MPLS paths
From: William McCall <william.mccall () gmail com>
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 07:41:23 -0500
Well, yes (if you don't count the additional traffic of signalling/routing protocols, label imposition, etc) but consider the fact that topologies change and routing will tend to change the total traffic handled through a node. LSPs are not static unless you use TE tunnels. Remember that labels are Forwarding Equivalency Classes and that translates into subnets (whether they're subnets in a L3 vpn or part of the P network) and the routing is still handled through an IGP or BGP. HTH --WJM IV On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 7:10 AM, Saqib Ilyas <msaqib () gmail com> wrote:
Hello everyone In the context of a single service provider network running MPLS, if a number of bandwidth constrained LSPs are passing through a particular node and the sum of the bandwidth constraints for the LSPs is X Mb/s, then is X the upper bound on the traffic through that node, or is it sometimes exceeded as well? Thanks and best regards
Current thread:
- Concerning MPLS paths Saqib Ilyas (Apr 27)
- Re: Concerning MPLS paths William McCall (Apr 27)
- Re: Concerning MPLS paths Saqib Ilyas (Apr 27)
- Re: Concerning MPLS paths Saqib Ilyas (Apr 27)
- Re: Concerning MPLS paths Saqib Ilyas (Apr 28)
- Re: Concerning MPLS paths Marshall Eubanks (Apr 28)
- Re: Concerning MPLS paths Saqib Ilyas (Apr 27)
- Re: Concerning MPLS paths Saqib Ilyas (Apr 28)
- Re: Concerning MPLS paths William McCall (Apr 27)