Hi Jim,
> As previously discussed, TTE assumes that there is adequate capacity > engineered into backup paths. Such capacity should already be present to > account for link failures. > > [Jim U>]The capacity of the backup topology may include one or more equal or > unequal cost paths to accommodate the additional load that is shunted. Are > you suggesting that this is a pre-defined set such that the backup set still > meets some percentage of SLA/SLOs? This is a valid tradeoff; I have had > similar discussions in re BGP Persistence and whether or not it should be > applied for different FOUs. That would seem to be highly advisable if you want to support SLA/SLOs despite link failures or congestion. Regards, Tony _______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
