Re: [mpls] working group adoption poll on draft-sitaraman-mpls-rsvp-shared-labels

[Lou Berger <[e-mail]>]

Hi Loa,

    I have some technical concerns about this document that IMO need to
be addressed. I think addressing them before adoption would be best but
is certainly not the only option:

- The document is completely silent on the impact of shared labels on TE
bandwidth/tspec/rspec related processing.  Clearly there is some no
inconsequential impact and this needs to be covered.

- The definition of ' pop and forward tunnel' is a circular at best  (it
references  'pop and forward labels' which are not defined at all.)  --
I think I understand what the draft is trying to do, but how do I really
know that my interpretation is right without a formal definition.  On an
aside, I think the use of 'pop label' is a poor choice as we'll have an
architecture that allows for a node to 'pop labels' (i.e., the operation
defined in RCF3031) and a new RFC that adds 'pop labels' which are
labels whose value indicates that the node should pop the label and
forwarded out the interface indicated in the label. BTW this functions
seems similar to egress control discussed in rfc4003.

- In writing this mail, it occurs to me that the addition of this
function is really an update to RFC3031 defined function and those
changes should be explicitly and formally described.

Lou

On 10/14/2017 11:20 AM, Loa Andersson wrote:
> Working Group,
>
> This is to start a two week poll on adopting 
> draft-sitaraman-mpls-rsvp-shared-labels-02 as a MPLS working group document.
>
> Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working
> group mailing list ([e-mail]). Please give a technical
> motivation for your support/not support, especially if you think that
> the document should not be adopted as a working group document.
>
> There are three IPR disclosures (though one disclosure seems to be an
> update) against this document.
>
> All the authors have stated on the MPLS wg mailing list that they are
> unaware of any other IPRs that those that has been disclosed
>
> The working group adoption poll ends October 29, 2017.
>
> /Loa
> mpls wg co-chair