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

Alexander Vainshtein <> Tue, 21 July 2015 15:05 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32C891B2EC2 for <>; Tue, 21 Jul 2015 08:05:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.301
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.301 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_51=0.6, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YEdHmq2xdBt4 for <>; Tue, 21 Jul 2015 08:05:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fe00::743]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2563B1A88C0 for <>; Tue, 21 Jul 2015 08:05:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id; Tue, 21 Jul 2015 15:04:56 +0000
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 15.01.0219.018; Tue, 21 Jul 2015 15:04:56 +0000
From: Alexander Vainshtein <>
To: Stewart Bryant <>, "Andrew G. Malis" <>, "S. Davari" <>
Thread-Topic: [mpls] draft-fang-mpls-label-forwarding-no-swap - how much does it really save?
Thread-Index: AQHQw8aaRLWhMNTKB0OPv6fwBySQ6Q==
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 15:04:56 +0000
Message-ID: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-mailer: Infraware POLARIS Mobile Mailer v2.5
authentication-results:; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;
x-originating-ip: []
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; DB3PR03MB0779; 5:CIGnz+X04bMgyakRBcfF5ipQTAeFkX0xkyBr9aG+UliXZCjpwEuz5r3NHlDExgiegRZdnjBdfyUKjPXe4suz3MfLo2b3gAHXGrgkbuPYGU3pFM5Mn5xX6qN78CRuYu4LAsfE5LuqThdyq+IgAppCOw==; 24:4iQ0jTLxgj/uIbSZFnqX3/8sksnEBGey1lOSJg1tfD5Im7nvV5RhYAtLvcvW5SZSSBPVjFmLiawNnwe9uAo6/+hHxag2Mc42WSTyylo5lsY=; 20:5/ve8MzdwN9ihLjCLzYwcmwww+zVA6VYEjlT1OYP/3OIimy3kT2+b5hU9YfvzAilbj/f/oxXbf1ccWifesT46Q==
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:DB3PR03MB0779;
db3pr03mb0779: X-MS-Exchange-Organization-RulesExecuted
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:;
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(5005006)(3002001); SRVR:DB3PR03MB0779; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:DB3PR03MB0779;
x-forefront-prvs: 0644578634
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(479174004)(377454003)(24454002)(19580405001)(5001770100001)(77156002)(87936001)(46102003)(74316001)(66066001)(5003600100002)(33656002)(86362001)(16236675004)(19617315012)(50986999)(15975445007)(62966003)(2656002)(77096005)(19580395003)(2521001)(102836002)(40100003)(106116001)(5001960100002)(5002640100001)(50226001)(122556002)(189998001)(92566002)(76576001)(230783001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DB3PR03MB0779;; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:sfv; LANG:en;
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_DB3PR03MB078098C91E8D3C7DCDCCF8C39D840DB3PR03MB0780eurp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 21 Jul 2015 15:04:56.3378 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 2c514a61-08de-4519-b4c0-921fef62c42a
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DB3PR03MB0779
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: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 15:05:25 -0000


Thumb typed on my LG,

------ Original message ------
From: Stewart Bryant
Date: 21/07/2015 17:58
To: Andrew G. Malis;S. Davari;
Subject:Re: [mpls] draft-fang-mpls-label-forwarding-no-swap - how much does it really save?

This draft proposes architectural changes, and as we can show that
these changes are not needed, in my view, this draft should not go

- Stewart

On 21/07/2015 09:02, Andrew G. Malis wrote:
As there are no architectural or protocol changes or IANA considerations, this draft should be informational if it goes forward (it currently says "standards track").


On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 8:52 PM, S. Davari  <<>> wrote:

I agree no standard change is required since this is a local optimization issue.


> On Jul 20, 2015, at 11:43 AM, Eric C Rosen <<>> wrote:
>> On 7/20/2015 2:07 PM, Shahram Davari wrote:
>> The new swapped labels (The outgoing  label that replaces the
>> incoming label) need to be stored in a table. Using this draft
>> reduces the number of swapped labels that needs to be stored,
>> regardless of  implementation. Don't you agree?
> No.  If you notice that the incoming label needs to be 'replaced' by an outgoing label of the same value, you could just make the rewrite string shorter, so it won't overwrite the top label on the stack.  This seems to be what the draft suggests, but it could be done as an optimization for the particular case where the incoming and outgoing labels have the same value.  You could do this today, as a local implementation optimization. There doesn't seem to be any interop issue or any change to the data plane semantics.
>> It also reduces the configuration and management of the new swapped labels.
> We're not discussing whether there are any advantages to the use of domain-wide labels.  We're discussing whether the use of domain-wide labels requires a change in the forwarding plane architecture.  I just don't see that it does.
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list

mpls mailing list<>

mpls mailing list<>

For corporate legal information go to: