2011
DOI: 10.1007/s11235-011-9603-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of IP-based and explicit paths for one-to-one fast reroute in MPLS networks

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 4 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Note that these tunnels are provided by a simple label stack in an MPLS/LDP (Multiprotocol Label Switching/Label Distribution Protocol) [2] enabled network, which is practically relevant nowadays. However, there exist MPLS networks with RSVP-TE (Reservation Protocol-Traffic Engineering) extension, wherein IPFRR is not the only option for fast protection [39,21]. On the other hand, suppose now that node s wants to send a packet to node d , and the link (s, b) fails.…”
Section: Providing Fast Protection With Lfasmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Note that these tunnels are provided by a simple label stack in an MPLS/LDP (Multiprotocol Label Switching/Label Distribution Protocol) [2] enabled network, which is practically relevant nowadays. However, there exist MPLS networks with RSVP-TE (Reservation Protocol-Traffic Engineering) extension, wherein IPFRR is not the only option for fast protection [39,21]. On the other hand, suppose now that node s wants to send a packet to node d , and the link (s, b) fails.…”
Section: Providing Fast Protection With Lfasmentioning
confidence: 99%