IETF Logo Mail Archive

[mpls] LDP Color LSP - downstream unsolicited and on-demand

"Santiago Alvarez (saalvare)" <saalvare@cisco.com> Fri, 02 August 2013 08:42 UTC

Return-Path: <saalvare@cisco.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 F054811E82B3 for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 01:42:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7eF0Jnnjlkno for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 01:42:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-7.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-7.cisco.com [173.37.86.78]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0649321F8756 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 01:38:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=578; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1375432686; x=1376642286; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=IFPA83+yfBbO9iHGFxfPKAFM7XNfX+HxAGn5TXNnlQ8=; b=Yn1Kuhy1jXRQbVAQkE6fbyY9jsMxxrOX+b8lV0RrfaCwd28ykjVPqFFu yEFd5N6/3mZaDxMiZ0QSBjcvni0rmt/CHlEMn/uPOjNfkE2VC5OLtppYP bxRkBbqpqQfAQs9kt7RxsRWRTbuedjZ3SEJnh6l08MPphzsDeV+uik30/ A=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgEFAMhu+1GtJV2Y/2dsb2JhbABbgwaBBb5NgRsWdIImAQEDOj8SASoUQiYBBA4NiAi5GY9WMYMgcwOpLYMXgio
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.89,799,1367971200"; d="scan'208";a="242643350"
Received: from rcdn-core-1.cisco.com ([173.37.93.152]) by rcdn-iport-7.cisco.com with ESMTP; 02 Aug 2013 08:38:02 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x11.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x11.cisco.com [173.36.12.85]) by rcdn-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r728c2hm020086 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for <mpls@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 08:38:02 GMT
Received: from xmb-aln-x09.cisco.com ([169.254.4.8]) by xhc-aln-x11.cisco.com ([173.36.12.85]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 03:38:02 -0500
From: "Santiago Alvarez (saalvare)" <saalvare@cisco.com>
To: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: LDP Color LSP - downstream unsolicited and on-demand
Thread-Index: Ac6PWyqry9DwoxlGSgaq5SIsAqUn8w==
Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2013 08:38:01 +0000
Message-ID: <0C8935EE66D53445A3D3982BD9BE54681DFADE56@xmb-aln-x09.cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.21.118.78]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "Santiago Alvarez (saalvare)" <saalvare@cisco.com>
Subject: [mpls] LDP Color LSP - downstream unsolicited and on-demand
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <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: Fri, 02 Aug 2013 08:43:00 -0000

If I understood the question correctly, Ina asked why draft-alvarez-mpls-ldp-color-lsp-00 was only considering downstream unsolicited label allocation.  As mentioned on the mic, draft focuses on downstream label allocation, both unsolicited and on-demand.  Here's a snippet from the current doc:

" An egress LSR MAY include the Color List TLV in a Label Mapping
   Message if using Downstream Unsolicited mode.  An LSR may include the
   TLV in Label Request Messages if using Downstream on Demand mode.   "

Any further feedback appreciated. Thanks.

SA
--

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email