IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mpls] Last Call: <draft-ietf-mpls-in-udp-04.txt> (Encapsulating MPLS in UDP) to Proposed Standard

Greg Daley <gdaley@au.logicalis.com> Thu, 30 January 2014 22:45 UTC

Return-Path: <gdaley@au.logicalis.com>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B95611A04DD; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 14:45:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.442
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.442 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RELAY_IS_203=0.994, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.535, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 iRSOL6yHGQeQ; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 14:45:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp2.au.logicalis.com (smtp2.au.logicalis.com [203.8.7.133]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44D5C1A04DA; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 14:45:00 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: None (smtp2.au.logicalis.com: no sender authenticity information available from domain of gdaley@au.logicalis.com) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=203.8.7.161; receiver=smtp2.au.logicalis.com; envelope-from="gdaley@au.logicalis.com"; x-sender="gdaley@au.logicalis.com"; x-conformance=spf_only
Received-SPF: None (smtp2.au.logicalis.com: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@sdcexchht.au.logicalis.com) identity=helo; client-ip=203.8.7.161; receiver=smtp2.au.logicalis.com; envelope-from="gdaley@au.logicalis.com"; x-sender="postmaster@sdcexchht.au.logicalis.com"; x-conformance=spf_only
Received: from unknown (HELO sdcexchht.au.logicalis.com) ([203.8.7.161]) by smtp2.au.logicalis.com with ESMTP; 31 Jan 2014 09:44:57 +1100
Received: from SDCEXCHMS.au.logicalis.com ([10.18.196.50]) by sdcexchht.au.logicalis.com ([fe80::68b7:8880:fefb:f742%12]) with mapi id 14.02.0347.000; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 09:44:54 +1100
From: Greg Daley <gdaley@au.logicalis.com>
To: 'Noel Chiappa' <jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>, "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [mpls] Last Call: <draft-ietf-mpls-in-udp-04.txt> (Encapsulating MPLS in UDP) to Proposed Standard
Thread-Index: AQHPHfHxZzPPQlRcgk6ua2U45NfiYJqd1tSw
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 22:44:54 +0000
Message-ID: <72381AF1F18BAE4F890A0813768D992817FDAB19@sdcexchms.au.logicalis.com>
References: <20140130193200.7BBD018C1C1@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20140130193200.7BBD018C1C1@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
Accept-Language: en-US, en-AU
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.18.196.186]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [mpls] Last Call: <draft-ietf-mpls-in-udp-04.txt> (Encapsulating MPLS in UDP) to Proposed Standard
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mpls/>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 22:45:03 -0000

>     > From: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
> 
>     > Simple solution -- don't use UDP.
> 
> Yes, because if we use a different protocol, any potential congestion will
> magically disappear!

Isn't that protocol called DCCP? (per RFC 4340 and 5348)

It would be interesting and potentially feasible to outline MPLS over DCCP (given a solid use case), but it would be one of the few (9) named application bindings for this protocol today:

http://www.iana.org/assignments/service-names-port-numbers/service-names-port-numbers.txt

Of course, in order to get the protocols to pass legacy firewall inspection, UDP encapsulation may be required, and companies would have to actually implement the protocol...

Greg Daley
gdaley@au.logicalis.com

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email