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

Jeff Tantsura <> Fri, 24 July 2015 15:24 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 969851A8A95 for <>; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 08:24:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.601
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, J_CHICKENPOX_42=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2QUSqIObEV_r for <>; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 08:24:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0BBE01A872E for <>; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 08:24:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c618062d-f799e6d00000329e-8d-55b1fc953f16
Received: from (Unknown_Domain []) by (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id B1.A3.12958.59CF1B55; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 10:51:33 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0210.002; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 11:24:08 -0400
From: Jeff Tantsura <>
To: Eric C Rosen <>
Thread-Topic: [mpls] draft-fang-mpls-label-forwarding-no-swap - how much does it really save?
Thread-Index: AQHQw8aa9ZzMct7NfE+8mJZi8kpzjJ3pW5YAgAAxxoCAAFKjgIABIPwA///BCB0=
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 15:24:07 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <> <>, <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFprMIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyuXRPiO7UPxtDDVp7bCxOPz/FZjF16wdm i/0L/7FbHHzexGixbgOQ+2/uHGaLW0tXslqcezqH0YHDY8rvjawem/4dZ/TYOesuu8eSJT+Z PK43XWX3aDm5n8Vj1vQ2No9Zsw4zBXBEcdmkpOZklqUW6dslcGVMPXacqWAOX0XvhNVMDYyr ubsYOTkkBEwkLszaygxhi0lcuLeerYuRi0NI4CijxO1nl1ghnOWMEtMPfGUCqWITMJD4/+04 C4gtIqAq8f1LDzNIEbPARCaJLfcng40SFoiTuLDyA1RRvETPrm5GCNtP4sX142wgNgtQc9ue /2A1vAL2Ek1vfkBtm8cksXH1CbAEp4CmxJtdH8E2MwLd9/3UGjCbWUBc4taT+UwQdwtILNlz HuoHUYmXj/+xQtToSCzY/YkNwtaWWLbwNTPEMkGJkzOfsExgFJ2FZNQsJC2zkLTMQtKygJFl FSNHaXFqWW66kcEmRmAsHpNg093BuOel5SFGAQ5GJR7eB8kbQ4VYE8uKK3MPMUpzsCiJ8zpG 5YUKCaQnlqRmp6YWpBbFF5XmpBYfYmTi4JRqYLSMm/y3qZRt2rnJ8b5vHvsVFaT/sudZZXuI z6d7q1M8h7vLdacne969vVfNudDtaepy6ZqE700cfGqbQ5+9eWr4MHofj+Ppi0KXNB4fvvjn hON7/i3e0nlLutM37vxUsVXp40bvZW/O8DC0/dY4myrEXPibu+/aI47Waz6VKX4GTAl3Dqs1 OiuxFGckGmoxFxUnAgATxzxtpgIAAA==
Archived-At: <>
Cc: "" <>
Subject: Re: [mpls] draft-fang-mpls-label-forwarding-no-swap - how much does it really save?
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 15:24:11 -0000

Experience talks ;-)

Would be really great to get quantification.


On Jul 24, 2015, at 5:09 PM, Eric C Rosen <> wrote:

>> When standard defines a "no-swap" operation,  ASIC engineer would
>> implement such operation completely differently
> Well, this is where we came in.  The RFCs do not dictate how the ASICs
> should be designed, and your ASIC designers are free to design in
> whatever way best meets the needs of the systems that are going to use
> those ASICs.  You can put in any optimizations you think are warranted.  If you expect the ASICs to be used in products that will never need to swap label values, never need to push labels, never need to pop labels, then you are free to design the ASICs without any of these features.  If you think that these operations are needed, but that "don't change the label value or the stack size" are the most common operations, you can certainly optimize your design for that case.
> But if you think you can get the ASICs designed properly simply by handing the RFCs to the ASIC designers, you may be in for an unpleasant surprise.
>> Since the label is to be "swap"ed with a new LABEL stack, then the
>> design of SWAPPING need to consider TTL handling such as 1) just
>> decrement of original TTL or 2) using a brand new TTL, such as using
>> local new register stored value to Fill the sawp'ed new label stack.
> The TTL handling is exactly the same for both cases.  If you have been telling your ASIC designers something different, you most definitely are in for an unpleasant surprise.
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list