IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

"Eggert, Lars" <lars@netapp.com> Tue, 14 January 2014 15:20 UTC

Return-Path: <lars@netapp.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 4F9D91AE026; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 07:20:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.44
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.44 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.538, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 rFw3jrPCtiB8; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 07:20:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx12.netapp.com (mx12.netapp.com [216.240.18.77]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E85B21ADFB6; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 07:20:30 -0800 (PST)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.95,658,1384329600"; d="asc'?scan'208"; a="136895002"
Received: from vmwexceht06-prd.hq.netapp.com ([10.106.77.104]) by mx12-out.netapp.com with ESMTP; 14 Jan 2014 07:20:18 -0800
Received: from SACEXCMBX06-PRD.hq.netapp.com ([169.254.9.60]) by vmwexceht06-prd.hq.netapp.com ([10.106.77.104]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 07:20:18 -0800
From: "Eggert, Lars" <lars@netapp.com>
To: Stewart Bryant <stbryant@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [mpls] Last Call: <draft-ietf-mpls-in-udp-04.txt> (Encapsulating MPLS in UDP) to Proposed Standard
Thread-Index: AQHPB81hZzPPQlRcgk6ua2U45NfiYJp7LVMAgAK2KoCAAFQ2gIAAckuAgAAJQICAAAZIAIAD31WAgABWjoCAAHXQgIAAN0wAgAEJtoCAACSXAIAAC26AgAAH1ACAABCuAA==
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 15:20:17 +0000
Message-ID: <DB6CF60F-FFBA-47DA-9FD6-7288CCB260A6@netapp.com>
References: <20140102151419.4692.48031.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <5933BB7D-2D2D-4145-A0B2-E92C8DA25844@netapp.com> <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE08242A8E@NKGEML512-MBS.china.huawei.com> <43B89809-F517-4BE2-BE1B-748A4B78FC7F@netapp.com> <52D01383.2080509@joelhalpern.com> <8DCFAFEE-2B06-4334-A5D7-7698D8D3081A@netapp.com> <CAPv4CP-iwoHEiV=xtNAd7qT4r8OYvfE1ZjnKE=wWY5VVcQ3x8w@mail.gmail.com> <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE0824427A@NKGEML512-MBS.china.huawei.com> <A1F82D9D-F9D0-46C1-B666-0C13DB79A845@netapp.com> <52D40B91.8040101@joelhalpern.com> <CAPv4CP9R-6Dv9O_H8Ox_-uLWMSzqpx7Gn97TF8jceFkVKPLWTw@mail.gmail.com> <52D518D9.7010703@cisco.com> <CAPv4CP-eNJuOKv4vWxGkiUPUTMkYyqY4cbTmj8M4sn+jXzmCkw@mail.gmail.com> <CAPv4CP-DnNdSoVEFTg9N53xP=yOd6pNe97WxmXJeGHBPKC2h6w@mail.gmail.com> <52D547B2.1060302@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <52D547B2.1060302@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.106.53.51]
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_13952AFE-BD28-4845-B407-D230F9474A8E"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha1"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, Scott Brim <scott.brim@gmail.com>, IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
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: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 15:20:35 -0000

On 2014-1-14, at 15:20, Stewart Bryant <stbryant@cisco.com> wrote:
> Yes, the inner (real) transport header is the only meaningful place
> to apply congestion avoidance.

But what if the inner traffic isn't congestion controlled?

Lars

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email