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

Re: [PWE3] PWE3 question

To: Shahram Davari <Shahram_Davari@pmc-sierra.com>
Subject: Re: [PWE3] PWE3 question
From: "Andrew G. Malis" <Andy.Malis@VivaceNetworks.com>
Date: Tue, 07 May 2002 18:12:14 -0400
Cc: "'pwe3@ietf.org'" <pwe3@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <4B6D09F3B826D411A67300D0B706EFDE84A79B@nt-exch-yow.pmc-sierra.bc.ca>
List-Id: Pseudo Wires Edge to Edge <pwe3.ietf.org>
Sender: pwe3-admin@ietf.org

Shahram,

Well, it wouldn't scale very well since every switch along the path is 
involved in the signaling for each VC, and you can't do traffic 
engineering, so I would say that's pretty much a non-starter.

Cheers,
Andy

At 5/7/2002 12:02 PM -0700, Shahram Davari wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Can we implement PWE3 with only one label (i.e., only VC label)?
>
>-Shahram
>
>_______________________________________________
>pwe3 mailing list
>pwe3@ietf.org
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3

_______________________________________________
pwe3 mailing list
pwe3@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3

References:
- [PWE3] PWE3 question
  - From: Shahram Davari

Prev by Date: RE: [PWE3] Adopt PW-MPLS MIB as PWE3 WG document
Next by Date: Re: [PWE3] Proposed way to move forward re ATM/MPLS
Previous by thread: [PWE3] PWE3 question
Next by thread: RE: [PWE3] PWE3 question
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread