[IPv6]MPLS WGLC on draft-ietf-mpls-mna-nrp-selector

[Adrian Farrel <[e-mail]>]

Please note that the MPLS working group is holding a last call on
draft-ietf-mpls-mna-nrp-selector. I am the document shepherd.

There are issues around the size of the NRP Selector / identifier that may
be of relevance to TEAS, 6MAN, and SPRING. I'd appreciate it if any
discussions could take place on the MPLS list so that it is easier to
coordinate.

The questions are:

1. How many bits are needed to encode the NRP Selector in the MPLS
forwarding plane?
It has been suggested that it is important to allow the same number of bits
in the forwarding plane as are available in the control plane.
It has also been pointed out that it is always possible to map between the
control plane representation and the forwarding plane representation, and it
is possible to limit the expression of the identifier in the control plane
such that it is suitable for a particular data plane.
Here, the opinion of TEAS may be helpful to us.

2. Should the encoding of the NRP Selector in the MPLS and SRv6 forwarding
planes be identical?
It has been suggested that in multi-technology-domain scenarios, it would be
helpful to have the same NRP Selector values in each domain. This could make
management and debugging simpler.
It has been pointed out that if the sizes of NRP Selector are different in
the two domains, the smaller can be used as a subset of the larger, to
enable multi-domain operation, or that mapping can be performed at the
domain boundaries.
This question is particularly relevant to 6MAN and SPRING.

Thanks for any thoughts.

Adrian