Hi JP - Your question got lost in the middle of text. > ad hoc routing fits in. There are two cases: > 1. The routing progresses in step with the signaling. That is, each > segment > is computed and signaled, then the next segment is computed and > signaled, and so on. In this case the each PCE is invoked > independently > and there is no cooperation or communication between PCEs. This is > the model shown in section 5.3. > 2. The alternative is that all of the routing is done before any > signaling > is > started. In this case, each PCE computes a segment of the path and > passes the request on to the next PCE to compute the next segment. > The segment paths are returned to the initial PCE which is able to > pass the full path to the PCC. > But this is exactly the case described in 5.4. > Clearly there are variables. > - Does the initial PCE send requests to more than one other PCE? > - Does the initial PCE suggest multiple border nodes? > - Do the downstream PCEs return multiple paths with different > qualities to allow the initial PCE to choose? > If the answer to these and other questions is "no" then you > have ad hoc routing. >
Payam, does this explanation close the point ? [PT] Yes- Adrian's update to clarify that the shared information can be TE information or path information closed this discussion. Thanks, Payam _______________________________________________ Pce mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
