IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mpls] entropy label indicator label indraft-kompella-mpls-entropy-label

Yong Lucy <lucyyong@huawei.com> Tue, 27 July 2010 13:24 UTC

Return-Path: <lucyyong@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E42873A69F2 for <mpls@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Jul 2010 06:24:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.546
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.546 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.052, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ugKZWSy8tGlK for <mpls@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Jul 2010 06:24:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com (szxga01-in.huawei.com [119.145.14.64]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 900E93A68B1 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Jul 2010 06:24:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (szxga01-in [172.24.2.3]) by szxga01-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0L6700AOOXA1LD@szxga01-in.huawei.com> for mpls@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jul 2010 21:25:13 +0800 (CST)
Received: from huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxga01-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0L670086CXA1FM@szxga01-in.huawei.com> for mpls@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Jul 2010 21:25:13 +0800 (CST)
Received: from y736742 (dhcp-72c7.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.114.199]) by szxml02-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0L6700A01X9V0Z@szxml02-in.huawei.com>; Tue, 27 Jul 2010 21:25:13 +0800 (CST)
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 08:25:09 -0500
From: Yong Lucy <lucyyong@huawei.com>
In-reply-to: <5E893DB832F57341992548CDBB3331639844EED6E7@EMBX01-HQ.jnpr.net>
To: 'John E Drake' <jdrake@juniper.net>, 'Kireeti Kompella' <kireeti@juniper.net>, 'Shane Amante' <shane@castlepoint.net>, mpls@ietf.org
Message-id: <034201cb2d8f$25cd0ec0$c7728182@china.huawei.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3350
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_yOJr2BYBpiTkTg1OLBJ+Fw)"
Thread-index: Acsth0oUJSF/XWniQyWod9gx1LMJ/QABXatQAACQDfA=
References: <02ac01cb2d87$a1c83ac0$c7728182@china.huawei.com> <5E893DB832F57341992548CDBB3331639844EED6E7@EMBX01-HQ.jnpr.net>
Subject: Re: [mpls] entropy label indicator label indraft-kompella-mpls-entropy-label
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 27 Jul 2010 13:24:55 -0000

What is the benefit for such control? Egress LSR does not use this value.

Lucy

 

  _____  

From: John E Drake [mailto:jdrake@juniper.net] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2010 8:10 AM
To: Yong Lucy; Kireeti Kompella; 'Shane Amante'; mpls@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [mpls] entropy label indicator label
indraft-kompella-mpls-entropy-label

 

Lucy, we discussed this and decided it was better to have the egress control
the values of the ELI it advertises.  Plus, getting a reserved value would
be difficult

 

From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Yong
Lucy
Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2010 5:31 AM
To: Kireeti Kompella; 'Shane Amante'; mpls@ietf.org
Subject: [mpls] entropy label indicator label in
draft-kompella-mpls-entropy-label

 

Hi Kireeti and Shane,

 

Could we consider use one of reserved label for ELI purpose? This will make
implementation much easy, i.e. not need to keep the state for each ELI
label. The approach can be used in general for RSVP-TE and BGP as well.

 

Regards,

Lucy

v2.39.1 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status