[mpls] draft-bryant-mpls-synonymous-flow-labels-00
"S. Davari" <davarish@yahoo.com> Fri, 27 March 2015 18:11 UTC
Return-Path: <davarish@yahoo.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 CE2FE1A87E8 for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 11:11:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.337
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.337 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, REPTO_QUOTE_YAHOO=0.646, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 flnqdkXw8iyh for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 11:11:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nm42-vm10.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com (nm42-vm10.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com [216.109.114.155]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DBA451A1B7F for <mpls@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 11:11:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s2048; t=1427479911; bh=xvzBFKSsvGGtUVwHeyWcsRCQKXe9w+xTWWqkM5eZFxU=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Subject:From:Subject; b=BxUqi9Of9OkSFiHebTWD29D2UBkZX/lkmLtVLmkKRimFEjmLOWh/mBTPW7jmiRGpkmY5LK9GP1V/ChHlL8TBH6Wwzur6p6eFdk4rXwMdNFm2cWOrrhZErykiJeBHvhipnWFmwJAKnsgSLmpaJaloI5Akfi8UN0QZLOA8W0Y22IiChHCMUiNGeKyw/pPqeUopcuKxRiUaOGQn5nQ0cf1aNUE2qWIp0QoeSGPpVAP/VrO0edvMHorbjHErlZFEQ0sXS3Y8S7+f4SdPCRcKXEl6bFJJf+5Ka2Omi0eOhG2jjuHnV9kw3xpD8o/j55nvr4jKLg1IP7J7KsmOtlVYx81Sog==
Received: from [66.196.81.174] by nm42.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 27 Mar 2015 18:11:51 -0000
Received: from [98.139.212.210] by tm20.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 27 Mar 2015 18:11:51 -0000
Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1019.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 27 Mar 2015 18:11:51 -0000
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3
X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 150050.75155.bm@omp1019.mail.bf1.yahoo.com
X-YMail-OSG: xAgt7r4VM1k3asIXmbiNRrXCzgfvW5q1qPAcoOntJW.x2RHLI_T7A1skiNk3XPz xc2VkUxbF7K5F66IiK.lYFXwRwFJLgdGlStg3i_GBJUQI7HvPcGtTMUiVBrCl08Q6mMocww8TAwj qurzd792iyfX.5F_mcjz7qudH3HTdk10XpYPcXXMUQNV81VhRbuSdyV2eWIDSKaQad9jJXkBPeM3 pqcwAQywDGBEmZV.6vxNl4c6XUsEJEawPalKASq_.wHT0AyvjMKTKW0ORHtaPTOjiWcJBlOXsCs8 dS06YKWdact4REn1yZGz0rmWjLGwgqvMZWYryvelJ5_SsRnzwMnChkLqBn9OxMwea0gm4QpaxWjX yixVnfi3OX42jHYZKbjAfSb0r49n0PSEr5CNEsNhbIoAsMmQvniH2pYpJ5xMLOkB.tYbbkF8XeSC KuCGV4RpRx077sZjm.0lahIOQ93ZWwnWyP__z6j.kta6iCith3amIe2VvyrBG00xMqs3zaWdk.km mEz_6HrKRO5P6JEOt
Received: by 76.13.27.197; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 18:11:50 +0000
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 18:11:50 +0000
From: "S. Davari" <davarish@yahoo.com>
To: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <589413153.3820380.1427479910186.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_3820379_57084218.1427479910179"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/7BoJEYIbLWHvwrQDJf3gB2joMnY>
Subject: [mpls] draft-bryant-mpls-synonymous-flow-labels-00
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: "S. Davari" <davarish@yahoo.com>
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: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 18:11:53 -0000
Hi, In order to carry a Flow ID end-to-end it means that the SFL labels can't merge, Then how does this work in the MP2P or ECMP? Does it require a downstream LSR to distribute many SFL labels (one per flow) for the same FEC to the same upstream node? How is this done? does it require new LDP or RSVP signaling? Also this is different from RFC6374 since data and OAM are now combined in one packet. A section to describe the required behavior will be useful. ThxShahram