Re: [mpls] draft-fang-mpls-label-forwarding-no-swap - how much does it really save?

[Robert Raszuk <[e-mail]>]

Stewart,

That is not quite correct.

I can have context label directing my packets to a completely new label
space on both old and new devices.

Therefor mutually disjoined non aligned label space is not sufficient
reason to enforce swap action on all LSRs.

Besides while you can call it as optimization what is the problem in
defining it ?

Cheers,
R.
On Jul 28, 2015 1:03 PM, "Stewart Bryant" <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Adding “NO_SWAP” for new/future generation DEVICE does NOT break backward
>> capability.
>>
>>  Andrew
>
> Existing devices should be assumed to have non-aligned label spaces.
> (there is much empirical evidence to support this position)
>
> So if you have a no-swap only device between two existing devices
> you cannot be sure that you can build an LSP.
>
> A backwards compatible device would therefore need to support swap.
>
> Once you support swap then no-swap become an optimization.
>
> - Stewart
>
>
>