Re: [mpls] thought about the ADI name

Loa Andersson <> Wed, 22 December 2021 22:54 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 345713A0E6F for <>; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 14:54:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.749
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-1.852, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lTjd3uBfG0IC for <>; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 14:54:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A5B2F3A0E43 for <>; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 14:54:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [] (unknown []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D9928365855; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 23:54:05 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2021 06:53:58 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.4.0
Content-Language: en-CA
To: Haoyu Song <>, "" <>
References: <> <>
From: Loa Andersson <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [mpls] thought about the ADI name
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2021 22:54:35 -0000


OK, I simply don't understand.

If you don't know what action you'll take, what good is it to know where 
to find the data?

It might be that this is not what you say, but that is what if get from 
your text below. Sorry if I'm misunderstanding.


On 23/12/2021 03:25, Haoyu Song wrote:
> Hi Loa,
> In my opinion the ADI should only be used to indicate the presence of AD.  E2E or HBH AD could be differentiated because in some case it can help stop further parsing beyond ADI.  Other information encoded in it won't help but complicate the parsing process. I strongly suggest any such proposal should give a clear presentation on why it's necessary and how it can help from the view of implementors, otherwise, we may end up with an over complicated design without tangible benefits.
> Best regards,
> Haoyu
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mpls <> On Behalf Of Loa Andersson
> Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2021 8:32 AM
> To:
> Subject: [mpls] thought about the ADI name
> Working Group,
> The MIAD Requirement Specification use the abbreviation ADI, it stands for Ancillary Data Indicator. Which is all nice and dandy.
> But isn't it he case  that the indicator gives us two things, the action to be performed and where to find the data needed, i.e., an Ancillary Data and Action indication (ADAI?).
> No I'm not suggesting that we change, but we should be aware, and it would be nice to have it mentioned somewhere.
> /Loa

Loa Andersson                        email:
Senior MPLS Expert                
Bronze Dragon Consulting             phone: +46 739 81 21 64