[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [bmwg] RE: Methodology for benchmarking fast failover time withlocal protection Part 2

Samir,


Thanks for proposing additional scenarios for the Fast Reroute Protection methodology. Upon reviewing your test cases, I believe that it might be a good idea to merge the proposed work with the draft-poretsky-mpls-protection-meth-04.txt. This would help to make the work already proposed more comprehensive and help us to be more focused.

 

Regards,

Rajiv

 

From: Samir Vapiwala (svapiwal) [mailto:svapiwal at cisco.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 9:43 AM
To: bmwg at ietf.org; sporetsky at reefpoint.com; rpapneja at isocore.com
Subject: [bmwg] RE: Methodology for benchmarking fast failover time withlocal protection Part 2

 

 Scott,

I read your draft draft-poretsky-mpls-protection-meth-04.txt and realized that we could expand on the FRR benchmarking of the failover times with all possible combination of topologies and additional test cases.

So Jay and I came up with a write-up that could be merged to the existing work of yours. Please take a look at this and let us know what you and the co-authors of draft-poretsky-mpls-protection-meth-04.txt think ? 

I'm sending my draft  fragmented into 2 text files and attached in 2 different emails to stay within the limit of  25K mail size. 

Thanks,

Samir

 

_______________________________________________
bmwg mailing list
bmwg at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg