Re: [mpls] Poll 1: ISD and PSD in the MNA Framework

[Rakesh Gandhi <[e-mail]>]

Hi Loa,



Yes, agree, the framework document must be solution independent. It can be
used to specify the “considerations” for various options for actions (e.g.
opcodes vs. bit catalogues), indicator labels, ancillary data, etc.
However, IMO it must not suggest which option to use for a specific
solution, as it will be up to the solution draft.



Thanks,

Rakesh



On Mon, May 30, 2022 at 5:21 PM Loa Andersson <[e-mail]> wrote:

> MPLS working group and and the Open MPLS DT,
>
> The working group chairs believe the current situation is:
>
> The Framework document must be solution independent and say:
>
> a packet may carry Ancillary Data using one or both of the following
> methods:
>
>     (1) in-stack, and
>
>     (2) post-stack.
>
> It is up to the document specifying the Network Action to specify which
> method is to be used for which Ancillary Data.
>
> Note, a Network Action may not require inclusion of Ancillary Data.
>
> Is this the consensus of the working group? Please respond to the MPLS
> WG mail list.
>
>
> Loa Andersson
> for the Open DT wg chairs
>
> --
> Loa Andersson                        email: [e-mail]
> Senior MPLS Expert                          [e-mail]
> Bronze Dragon Consulting             phone: [phone]
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>