Lets just get some FACTS straight out On 9/28/02 3:29 PM, "Valdis.Kletnieks@VT.EDU" <Valdis.Kletnieks@VT.EDU> wrote: > On Sun, 29 Sep 2002 06:20:59 +0859, Masataka Ohta said: > >> RSVP establishes the per-flow state before the packets can flow. I missed Ohta Son's original post, thanks to Valdis for catching this incorrect statement. IP packets can flow anytime. If/when deployed, the existence of an RSVP reservation is expected to improve the delivery quality of those IP packets, and the lack or breakdown of that reservation simply leaves the packets with their regular best effort delivery. >> It is just a minor engineering decision to allow optional circuit >> switched service over a best-effort-capable network. > > 1) I wasn't aware that RSVP caused packets to be routed according to > a flow ID contained in the packet rather than the IP address in the packet. > > 2) If an intermediate router handling an RSVP connection decides to > die an interesting death, packets can still be sent (assuming things like > multihoming and BGP convergence) and successfully arrive before a new > RSVP setup completes. > > It doesn't sound like a circuit-switching scheme, it sounds like a resource > reservation scheme to guarantee sufficient bandwidth. > -- > Valdis Kletnieks > Computer Systems Senior Engineer > Virginia Tech