Re: [mpls] [spring] [SPRING] Query related to SR Architecture

Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> Thu, 10 September 2015 18:38 UTC

Return-Path: <rraszuk@gmail.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 C89161A8AEF; Thu, 10 Sep 2015 11:38:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.277
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.277 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 eBIPCuxsDwYS; Thu, 10 Sep 2015 11:38:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x232.google.com (mail-wi0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B0F2C1A2130; Thu, 10 Sep 2015 11:38:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wicgb1 with SMTP id gb1so35896197wic.1; Thu, 10 Sep 2015 11:38:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=J4bOBU2FHEifegM4KY0GiyCDW5l0abxiTRxPX16g9/s=; b=YImq9zWv1GE+AZaPqweoM3ceYbKBDjJEkSCXIb3JxxFjsQw85dmcwuCVYSw52NKPWJ Qo2XR9CNh11lY1SF3FlfhQxloyt6sQnVCnw4YjqShXwNKS7u59ydmU140myFO/hjJiox KTyplzRGExTjrlUGNSuEyDImJxFeaZcnomJCZHNYpU4Ea0lFbFq8W3DmKGOMNys4m1ZK ftzHXCVvf9qCUR6f96Tr/DL+kAMaNriHppQSH4zlYmhFXlUcnisQZHPzVPCVH8btPCkL 5ycUH4pSJP8p06yi9i+95NZZtPaSW03+jZZFwV1nr41yzKHYbie+z0ID8Y7tiCyTUyh5 AXGg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.122.97 with SMTP id lr1mr72716346wjb.26.1441910297290; Thu, 10 Sep 2015 11:38:17 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: rraszuk@gmail.com
Received: by 10.194.37.5 with HTTP; Thu, 10 Sep 2015 11:38:17 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <D21742AA.2E003%acee@cisco.com>
References: <544F5E3F-82AD-49BA-A83B-201DE49A08A6@juniper.net> <327562D94EA7BF428CD805F338C31EF06C0496F5@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com> <99EAE216-DB6C-4AFD-8E5C-E834D68CBF52@juniper.net> <327562D94EA7BF428CD805F338C31EF06C04975F@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com> <151A634F-9F72-40E6-AAC7-94F66F2CDFF5@juniper.net> <D2171FC6.2DF9A%acee@cisco.com> <327562D94EA7BF428CD805F338C31EF06C049BD1@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com> <D21742AA.2E003%acee@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2015 20:38:17 +0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: xmqocx9a2BpRP-QG9pqOf4I5k90
Message-ID: <CA+b+ERkZS=s-B57e6_GM_N-CENnKJK5MGZyJga68QLgX7PLKSA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01228c70116e2d051f68e7fe
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/NA274FKx8fbNotMrDnMKsoec7aI>
Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, Gaurav agrawal <gaurav.agrawal@huawei.com>, Vinod Kumar S 70786 <v70786@notesmail.huawei.com.cn>, "spring@ietf.org" <spring@ietf.org>, "Anil Kumar S N \(VRP Network BL\)" <anil.sn@huawei.com>, Pushpasis Sarkar <psarkar@juniper.net>
Subject: Re: [mpls] [spring] [SPRING] Query related to SR Architecture
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Thu, 10 Sep 2015 18:38:19 -0000

​Hey Acee,
​


> In MPLS, one label is like any other label (except for the first 15 which
> are reserved). I think you are missing a whole lot of context here - you
> can’t just declare a new label type with different semantics.
>


​That is actually quite incorrect :)  We do declare new semantics for
labels all the time ... ​

Few examples:

- context label
- entropy label
- sr label
etc...

​Cheers,
R​