GMPLS Asymmetric Bandwidth Bidirectional Label Switched Paths (LSPs)

Takacs, Alexandru; Berger, Lou; Caviglia, Diego; Fedyk, Don; Meuric, Julien

doi:10.17487/rfc6387

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…LSPs in GMPLS networks are typically bidirectional, as opposed to traditional MPLS LSPs. Bandwidth reservations can be asymmetric for the two path directions [3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Hybrid Method for Signalling Transport in GMPLS Control Plane

Stojanović¹,

Miladic²,

Marković³

2016

ElAEE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper addresses the issue of signalling transport in control plane of the Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) network. The two basic methods for establishing control channels in optical networks are the infibre-out-of-band and the out-of-fibre. Starting from the analysis of benefits and drawbacks of those methods, we propose and investigate a novel, flexible method for signalling transport, which is based on the analysis of the given network topology and combines the basic methods to achieve a trade-off between requirements for low latency and high reliability. Performance analysis has shown that, with hybrid method, data path setup times are close to the ones achieved with the in-fibreout-of-band method, while preserving satisfying reliability and flexibility to integrate into multi-domain networks.

show abstract

“…LSPs in GMPLS networks are typically bidirectional, as opposed to traditional MPLS LSPs. Bandwidth reservations can be asymmetric for the two path directions [3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Hybrid Method for Signalling Transport in GMPLS Control Plane

Stojanović¹,

Miladic²,

Marković³

2016

ElAEE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The approach for supporting asymmetric bandwidth co-routed bidirectional LSPs is defined in [RFC6387]. The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%