IETF Logo Mail Archive

[mpls] I send my second question on draft-farrel-mpls-sfc-02.txt according to co-chair's request

Xuxiaohu <xuxiaohu@huawei.com> Tue, 14 November 2017 06:57 UTC

Return-Path: <xuxiaohu@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4018129473 for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 22:57:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.221
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.221 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 Wb3cn4Mfl2Vl for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 22:57:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25A43127977 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 22:57:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lhreml704-cah.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.106]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 546E41550E4E0 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Nov 2017 06:57:44 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from NKGEML413-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.74) by lhreml704-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.45) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.361.1; Tue, 14 Nov 2017 06:57:45 +0000
Received: from NKGEML515-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.5.148]) by NKGEML413-HUB.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.74]) with mapi id 14.03.0361.001; Tue, 14 Nov 2017 14:57:42 +0800
From: Xuxiaohu <xuxiaohu@huawei.com>
To: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: I send my second question on draft-farrel-mpls-sfc-02.txt according to co-chair's request
Thread-Index: AdNdFalkyaky0C6USqydThV+8YOeGw==
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2017 06:57:41 +0000
Message-ID: <1FEE3F8F5CCDE64C9A8E8F4AD27C19EE3047AF93@NKGEML515-MBS.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.52.44.120]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/bmH5QH65b2Non2Y7qNEBBI_kSOA>
Subject: [mpls] I send my second question on draft-farrel-mpls-sfc-02.txt according to co-chair's request
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Tue, 14 Nov 2017 06:57:48 -0000

Hi all,

My second question is what's the difference between the second MPLS-based SFC approach (draft-farrel-mpls-sfc-02.txt) and the MPLS-SR-based SFC approach (draft-xu-mpls-service-chaining) from the technology perspective.

Best regards,
Xiaohu

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email