Re: [mpls] MPLS-RT review of draft-bryant-mpls-sfl-framework

Stewart Bryant <> Thu, 04 May 2017 13:23 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0625B12762F; Thu, 4 May 2017 06:23:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.101
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.101 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5oS-HbvASZZ7; Thu, 4 May 2017 06:23:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 64903126C0F; Thu, 4 May 2017 06:23:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id z52so7791502wrc.2; Thu, 04 May 2017 06:23:10 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=WUeuHACSSJGTssF/Oc8Gz4f78KJjRAXRoFon2ECXH9Y=; b=FQ2rX71f2dJ2ajkSb/WlSbr/YN86DgmlijdxyDw5svWF/XRLMBBcYINKyxM7xWuOZQ ZPqCZX+CUIPsNIk0yzjIxi+iOX9y4NwzAFPeshE9ZjCgWGp+Svx/Iz6DI9ugCKmzpvw9 +AD8to3mrzjgocHt6kWr9sV1RYMdZ4EOmeRGXRIH5fo4Dw3D0jFuPLWOBFP5p7Ud4NdO zz5pZe8aoiSx+RZCG2LYeNErPCcfYGp4e0NOzqO/W1sSztusD/ebaSq+T7TP6Yw/xZPH 4vvrLQkDEE08L0gdE9pns0pqyKOhNVbR2Kg3X7C+Vpu2VDewRlnKU6UNDyPlfOjH46G5 kK8A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=WUeuHACSSJGTssF/Oc8Gz4f78KJjRAXRoFon2ECXH9Y=; b=ddwmlGWwhiKzAuPv8f0NEhs3GpKd9MrGleFoBACyLuIN9MmW8RYmLfpsS+iy5VcNuH rcBhsU8DKgN0V/JlXZH2ozoyDsv7MNS6zSy7684sSORNP7r6ys23n/Z3g/8Phs3J7bTh JLETZ+eTEIhd4sfjkXMtJxNp473O5cu6VnF5sTdM1f82+vE6CwumDFuWusd94s1NsbIc JfEevv8qqUd3jZsPMJuZjOGA7Nzr9RtUD3msPJwo1WVObn/ZWhLrwWv4Xi0vy/TZTjFf P46PlTJjBrODIEF7ao8RMRsQGee+etugiK4bm6mGgdAajq+Uf+E1mMYKTHp45G63hdYL ai6A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AN3rC/7uU+YZwy+7I1eXkU/KnNOMw96y0rgd7NZIQzCJqUyVEcfslxUn s9YJj9tQ2sdV4RIPOsI=
X-Received: by with SMTP id n32mr33113897wrb.131.1493904188719; Thu, 04 May 2017 06:23:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ( []) by with ESMTPSA id w136sm1310313wmd.0.2017. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 04 May 2017 06:23:08 -0700 (PDT)
To: "Andrew G. Malis" <>, "" <>,
References: <>
Cc: mpls-chairs <>
From: Stewart Bryant <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Thu, 4 May 2017 14:22:56 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [mpls] MPLS-RT review of draft-bryant-mpls-sfl-framework
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 May 2017 13:23:12 -0000

On 27/04/2017 15:13, Andrew G. Malis wrote:
> Authors and WG,
> I have been selected as a pre-adoption MPLS Review Team reviewer for 
> draft-bryant-mpls-sfl-framework.
> While not really necessary for WG adoption, I note that idnits runs clean.
> The draft is short and straightforward. My only comment on the content 
> is that it may be useful to note that in some router implementations, 
> the use of a synonymous label may, depending on triggered action, 
> force a packet from an internal fast path to an internal slow path.

Yes, but you would know that was the case and might refuse the SL setup 

> In such cases, it may be useful to limit the use of a synonymous label 
> to a fraction of those on a particular LSP or PW. However, as noted in 
> section 4, this may lead to ECMP interactions unless an Entropy Label 
> is also used. It may also lead to out-of-order packets on a PW.

In the PW (or VPN) case the text in section 4 addresses the problem.

> Regardless of this comment, I feel that this draft is ready for WG 
> adoption, and does not need to be updated prior to adoption.
Thank you.

> Cheers,
> Andy