IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Kireeti Kompella <kireeti@juniper.net> Wed, 28 July 2010 09:06 UTC

Return-Path: <kireeti@juniper.net>
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 6F4993A687D for <mpls@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Jul 2010 02:06:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 Fe8wGx8ElsB6 for <mpls@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Jul 2010 02:06:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exprod7og110.obsmtp.com (exprod7og110.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.173]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E1F83A69B9 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Jul 2010 02:06:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from source ([66.129.224.36]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob110.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKTE/zPsfVuAoZUur2ib0wCIaMf95zsZAB@postini.com; Wed, 28 Jul 2010 02:07:12 PDT
Received: from EMBX01-HQ.jnpr.net ([fe80::c821:7c81:f21f:8bc7]) by P-EMHUB02-HQ.jnpr.net ([fe80::88f9:77fd:dfc:4d51%11]) with mapi; Wed, 28 Jul 2010 02:05:38 -0700
From: Kireeti Kompella <kireeti@juniper.net>
To: "curtis@occnc.com" <curtis@occnc.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2010 02:05:35 -0700
Thread-Topic: [mpls] entropy label indicator label indraft-kompella-mpls-entropy-label
Thread-Index: AcsuNAu9ktCWWz+3SlqxCVbKJAH1wA==
Message-ID: <EBCA99AB-3D5C-4CD2-91A7-D421144B2175@juniper.net>
References: <201007280737.o6S7bcXk090494@harbor.orleans.occnc.com>
In-Reply-To: <201007280737.o6S7bcXk090494@harbor.orleans.occnc.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, "stbryant@cisco.com" <stbryant@cisco.com>
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: Wed, 28 Jul 2010 09:06:51 -0000

Hi Curtis, Stewart,

On Jul 28, 2010, at 00:37 , Curtis Villamizar wrote:

> 
> In message <4C4EEC02.2040202@cisco.com>
> Stewart Bryant writes:
>> 
>> John
>> 
>> Why do you prefer to use an ELI as opposed to using a new set of FECs
>> with the property that they are followed by an EL?
>> 
>> Stewart
> 
> 
> Stewart,
> 
> The same TE LSP can carry an IP payload and other MPLS LSP.  This
> avoids confusing an entropy label with a forwarding label.

In a discussion yesterday, it occurred to me that upstream allocated labels also call for the use of ELI.  Again, the issue is confusing an EL with a forwarding label.  We'll spell this out in the next revision.

> The egress does not have to know apriori whether the ingress is adding
> an entropy label and the ingress is free to add an entropy label to
> some but not all traffic.
> 
> The draft only provides LDP signaling.  TE signaling should also be
> provided.  The entropy label can be a per host value (platform label
> space) and it doesn't matter much where in OSPF-TE or ISIS-TE the TLV
> is placed.

That's the plan (and BGP signaling as well).

Kireeti.

v2.27.6 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status