[mpls] Re: WG last call: draft-ietf-mpls-inband-pm-encapsulation

xiao.min2@zte.com.cn Thu, 09 May 2024 04:12 UTC

Return-Path: <xiao.min2@zte.com.cn>
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 3346FC1516F3; Wed, 8 May 2024 21:12:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.895
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.895 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id P3UHOXEtuTAr; Wed, 8 May 2024 21:12:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mxhk.zte.com.cn (mxhk.zte.com.cn [63.216.63.40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 36DF3C15109F; Wed, 8 May 2024 21:12:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mxct.zte.com.cn (unknown [192.168.251.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mxhk.zte.com.cn (FangMail) with ESMTPS id 4VZdrt4HBPz8XrXP; Thu, 9 May 2024 12:12:30 +0800 (CST)
Received: from mse-fl1.zte.com.cn (unknown [10.5.228.132]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mxct.zte.com.cn (FangMail) with ESMTPS id 4VZdrJ42SHz50FXX; Thu, 9 May 2024 12:12:00 +0800 (CST)
Received: from njy2app04.zte.com.cn ([10.40.12.64]) by mse-fl1.zte.com.cn with SMTP id 4493eoIU031789; Thu, 9 May 2024 11:40:50 +0800 (+08) (envelope-from xiao.min2@zte.com.cn)
Received: from mapi (njy2app02[null]) by mapi (Zmail) with MAPI id mid201; Thu, 9 May 2024 11:40:52 +0800 (CST)
Date: Thu, 09 May 2024 11:40:52 +0800
X-Zmail-TransId: 2afa663c45c4ffffffffa2a-e119c
X-Mailer: Zmail v1.0
Message-ID: <20240509114052345ZwAMPtSVm-526ZCXLLnbL@zte.com.cn>
In-Reply-To: <0d6c4d6b70394fe6ba8333c69985bb3b@h3c.com>
References: 0d6c4d6b70394fe6ba8333c69985bb3b@h3c.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
From: xiao.min2@zte.com.cn
To: linchangwang.04414@h3c.com
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=====_001_next====="
X-MAIL: mse-fl1.zte.com.cn 4493eoIU031789
X-Fangmail-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-Fangmail-MID-QID: 663C4D2E.003/4VZdrt4HBPz8XrXP
Message-ID-Hash: A2RLZZ5Y6BP77TNZEQ6EA2JTGWEHO6IW
X-Message-ID-Hash: A2RLZZ5Y6BP77TNZEQ6EA2JTGWEHO6IW
X-MailFrom: xiao.min2@zte.com.cn
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-mpls.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: mpls@ietf.org, mpls-chairs@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [mpls] Re: WG last call: draft-ietf-mpls-inband-pm-encapsulation
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/i810bYCfhJNZxyEO9thZ2NYKpSE>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mpls>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:mpls-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:mpls-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:mpls-leave@ietf.org>

Hi Changwang,
Thanks for your review and comments.
Please see inline.

Original


From: linchangwang <linchangwang.04414@h3c.com>
To: Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li>;mpls <mpls@ietf.org>;mpls@ietf.org <mpls@ietf.org>;
Cc: mpls-chairs <mpls-chairs@ietf.org>;
Date: 2024年05月09日 10:29
Subject: [mpls] Re: WG last call: draft-ietf-mpls-inband-pm-encapsulation

_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list -- mpls@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to mpls-leave@ietf.org
 

 


Hi all,
 
I support the publication of this draft.
[XM]>>> Thank you for your support.:-)
 
I have two minor questions:
1.In section 5, FLC and FRLD Considerations, it is suggested not to reference an individual draft: [I-D.xzc-lsr-mpls-flc-frld].
[XM]>>> Note that this is an informative reference, which doesn't constitute any constraint on the implementation.


2.When both Label for FLI and Label for ELI are present, is there a need for a specific order in implementation? Which label should come first?
[XM]>>> As far as I know, the existing implementations of this document don't use ELI. To your question, I believe it depends on how your chip looks up the FLI/ELI and processes the FL/EL, and my personal feeling is that the order doesn't matter.


Cheers,
Xiao Min
 
Thanks,
Changwang
 
 

From: Tony Li



Date: 2024-04-25 23:09



To: mpls



CC: mpls-chairs



Subject: [mpls] WG last call: draft-ietf-mpls-inband-pm-encapsulation





 

[WG chair hat: on]


  

Hi all,


 

This starts a 2 week working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-inband-pm-encapsulation.


 

This last call ends at 12:01 PM PDT, Thurs. May 9, 2024.


 

Please send all comments to the mailing list.


 

Regards,



Tony




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 本邮件及其附件含有新华三集团的保密信息,仅限于发送给上面地址中列出
 的个人或群组。禁止任何其他人以任何形式使用(包括但不限于全部或部分地泄露、复制、
 或散发)本邮件中的信息。如果您错收了本邮件,请您立即电话或邮件通知发件人并删除本
 邮件!
 This e-mail and its attachments contain confidential information from New H3C, which is 
 intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed above. Any use of the 
 information contained herein in any way (including, but not limited to, total or partial 
 disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than the intended 
 recipient(s) is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender 
 by phone or email immediately and delete it!