[Detnet-dp-dt] LFIB proposals

Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu> Tue, 28 February 2017 14:35 UTC

Return-Path: <loa@pi.nu>
X-Original-To: detnet-dp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: detnet-dp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89254129528 for <detnet-dp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 06:35:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1GKFn-XMBEOP for <detnet-dp-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 06:35:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB8CB1295AD for <detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 06:35:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.11] (unknown [119.95.38.221]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6C17B18014F3 for <detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 15:35:21 +0100 (CET)
To: "detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org" <detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org>
From: Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>
Message-ID: <2c2d99cb-5e12-2328-a7f2-07bde1bfdef0@pi.nu>
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 22:35:17 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------C230187CD753E594566F88E6"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/detnet-dp-dt/08DlzfQGgh8s7hMT3P5rSgEvuQc>
Subject: [Detnet-dp-dt] LFIB proposals
X-BeenThere: detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: DetNet WG Data Plane Design Team <detnet-dp-dt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/detnet-dp-dt>, <mailto:detnet-dp-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/detnet-dp-dt/>
List-Post: <mailto:detnet-dp-dt@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:detnet-dp-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet-dp-dt>, <mailto:detnet-dp-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 14:35:30 -0000

Folks,

I talked Yuanlong earlier today, and we agreed do work a bit on "each 
others slides and texts". Yuanlong agreed to do the label stacks for "my
slide 7" and I agreed convert "my slide 7" to an LFIB. That text is 
included. Given what I said earlier there needs to be some (a lot of)
proof reading done, b ut I think the idea is clear.

One odd thing is that I've been going towards that we don't need the
L-level labels, when doing the LFIB I'm less convinced that we can do
without them. It turns out that what Stewart Bryant has been talking
about over the last year "MPLS labels as instructions", L-labels are
(among other things) an instruction to do or not to do replication/
elimination.

Sorry I've not had time to look at multicast.

/Loa

-- 


Loa Andersson                        email: loa@mail01.huawei.com
Senior MPLS Expert                          loa@pi.nu
Huawei Technologies (consultant)     phone: +46 739 81 21 64