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

"Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> Thu, 10 September 2015 18:44 UTC

Return-Path: <acee@cisco.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 DB1FC1B5916; Thu, 10 Sep 2015 11:44:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.51
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.51 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] 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 ijbBl57V_qBL; Thu, 10 Sep 2015 11:44:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-6.cisco.com (alln-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.142.93]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 557631B56D4; Thu, 10 Sep 2015 11:44:29 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=5696; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1441910669; x=1443120269; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=HY47CNIg9X/fCqzVuYOL3aYa8Id1Lm6nSyuYPBF99ro=; b=nCHOvw2Po7muephceopz8vIroSG8rXd+DXpWNvhb90EqFNbwww+/pebj qYk5+uMsKPYLSxNC2B0DBSjjo21usG+zcfZYOer3ezJybB+2wZVm+KvhW hwGD3CBp8y1gymOyMq5WXufz2YvXApKAuxDrSNq22HYZfKosj6Ozfrvs6 k=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AbAgDdzvFV/5JdJa1dglZNgT0GgyC6BQENh3ACHIE0OBQBAQEBAQEBgQqEJAEBBCNWEAIBCBItAwICAjAUAw4CBA4FiC64IZQLAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBF4kCgmyFDAeCaS+BFAWVVgGMeZp4HwEBQoQAcYdEgQUBAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,506,1437436800"; d="scan'208,217";a="186856604"
Received: from rcdn-core-10.cisco.com ([173.37.93.146]) by alln-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 10 Sep 2015 18:44:28 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-015.cisco.com (xch-aln-015.cisco.com [173.36.7.25]) by rcdn-core-10.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t8AIiSWf013763 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 10 Sep 2015 18:44:28 GMT
Received: from xch-aln-015.cisco.com (173.36.7.25) by XCH-ALN-015.cisco.com (173.36.7.25) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Thu, 10 Sep 2015 13:44:27 -0500
Received: from xhc-aln-x15.cisco.com (173.36.12.89) by xch-aln-015.cisco.com (173.36.7.25) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 10 Sep 2015 13:44:27 -0500
Received: from xmb-aln-x06.cisco.com ([169.254.1.223]) by xhc-aln-x15.cisco.com ([173.36.12.89]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Thu, 10 Sep 2015 13:44:27 -0500
From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
To: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Thread-Topic: [mpls] [spring] [SPRING] Query related to SR Architecture
Thread-Index: AQHQ6x7eIkcW1d9q2U2kd/ro+ilNHp41s27wgAB4xoCAAAtgAIAABJgA///GWQCAAFBzAP//1USAgABFD4CAAAG4AA==
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2015 18:44:27 +0000
Message-ID: <AD1F906B-653E-45DB-8347-40CE294FC031@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> <CA+b+ERkZS=s-B57e6_GM_N-CENnKJK5MGZyJga68QLgX7PLKSA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+b+ERkZS=s-B57e6_GM_N-CENnKJK5MGZyJga68QLgX7PLKSA@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [173.37.102.12]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_AD1F906B653E45DB834740CE294FC031ciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/_KEKJP-KLDsRhDOboczdROy5ZnU>
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 18:44:31 -0000

Hi Robert,

On Sep 10, 2015, at 2:38 PM, Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net<mailto:robert@raszuk.net>> wrote:

​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…

But the mechanisms for advertising the label semantics as such must be specified as well.

Thanks,
Acee



​Cheers,
R​