Re: [mpls] comments on draft-ietf-mpls-sfc-encapsulation-01

Hi John,

It also allows for per-SFP or per-flow metadata.  Just doesn't allow for
per-packet metadata.

Thanks,
Anoop

On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 11:47 AM John E Drake <jdrake@juniper.net> wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
>
> Comment inline
>
>
>
> Yours Irrespectively,
>
>
>
> John
>
>
>
> *From:* mpls [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Anoop Ghanwani
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 5, 2018 2:24 PM
> *To:* mpls@ietf.org
> *Subject:* Re: [mpls] comments on draft-ietf-mpls-sfc-encapsulation-01
>
>
>
> Hi Andy,
>
>
>
> Yes, I agree my comment wasn't complete.  Perhaps this is better:
>
> "using MPLS as a replacement for NSH (with some loss of functionality) is
> described elsewhere [x]."
>
>
>
> *[JD]  Using the MPLS label stack rather than the NSH to carry the Service
> Path Identifier (SPI) and Service Identifier (SI) is described in …*
>
>
>
> Also for the second comment, this may be better.
>
>
>
> "as a part of normal processing, the SFF Label becomes
>
> the top label in the stack."
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Anoop
>
> On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 11:14 AM Andrew G. Malis <agmalis@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Anoop,
>
>
>
> Thanks, I'll discuss these suggestions with my co-authors. Also, now that
> we've requested WG LC, Loa may want to treat this as a last call comment.
>
>
>
> Your first comment isn't quite correct, since draft-ietf-mpls-sfc only
> replaces some of the functions of the NSH. For example, there's no
> packet-by-packet metadata.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Andy
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 1:57 PM Anoop Ghanwani <anoop@alumni.duke.edu>
> wrote:
>
> I think it would be useful for this document to reference
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mpls-sfc
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tools.ietf.org_html_draft-2Dietf-2Dmpls-2Dsfc&d=DwMFaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=CRB2tJiQePk0cT-h5LGhEWH-s_xXXup3HzvBSMRj5VE&m=GF5N7QRjSUOtBmx2p0R4gvpBoU5Wyz5nwfbCtE_IUgI&s=db-AmKlTRZlCB0iVIkqVVs9ndN2e-Oo08TNef43l9O8&e=>
>
> in the introduction to say that "using MPLS to replace the function of NSH
> is described elsewhere [x]".
>
>
>
> I think the following:
>
> >>>
>
> the SFF Label will rise to the top of the label stack before
>
> the packet is forwarded to another node and before the packet
>
> is dispatched to a higher layer.
>
> >>>
>
> would be better worded as:
>
>
>
> "as a part of normal processing, the SFF Label will become
>
> the top label in the stack before the packet is forwarded
>
> to another node and before the packet is dispatched to a higher layer."
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Anoop
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_mpls&d=DwMFaQ&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=CRB2tJiQePk0cT-h5LGhEWH-s_xXXup3HzvBSMRj5VE&m=GF5N7QRjSUOtBmx2p0R4gvpBoU5Wyz5nwfbCtE_IUgI&s=SjAIyvNitzG1Hl4Yhw8do0D7ABHmIC0VBmEBSNKSINU&e=>
>
>