IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mpls] MPLS extension header

" 徐小虎(义先) " <xiaohu.xxh@alibaba-inc.com> Thu, 09 August 2018 02:56 UTC

Return-Path: <xiaohu.xxh@alibaba-inc.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 7FFD6130F12; Wed, 8 Aug 2018 19:56:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.019
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.019 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FROM_EXCESS_BASE64=0.979, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=alibaba-inc.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uM1lZNJnPYai; Wed, 8 Aug 2018 19:56:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out0-145.mail.aliyun.com (out0-145.mail.aliyun.com [140.205.0.145]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 49D5E130DC4; Wed, 8 Aug 2018 19:56:07 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alibaba-inc.com; s=default; t=1533783364; h=Date:From:To:Message-ID:Subject:MIME-Version:Content-Type; bh=9cXIB4BwTk2x7v43YFTLSLRNsbvg8RkeiClsS+yOkJQ=; b=bKzkLA1k971ZaYPm8PpNyMveKlMbgli+6n2HiSt9dKSuxre/+SbccLgCxMmQbG431ExiH7qmS9qpRI/X+3cenRorz/X12SqKoMjf0iYt/DQaFirT2lBUNVvykmCMpcacoqhNbYl0ygl19mihS2s5IwE3WfGZApOVJ5muVQW+EGA=
X-Alimail-AntiSpam: AC=PASS; BC=-1|-1; BR=01201311R181e4; CH=green; FP=0|-1|-1|-1|0|-1|-1|-1; HT=e02c03296; MF=xiaohu.xxh@alibaba-inc.com; NM=1; PH=DW; RN=2; SR=0; TI=W4_5335686_v5ForWebDing_0A930BF4_1533783034436_o7001c409n;
Received: from WS-web (xiaohu.xxh@alibaba-inc.com[W4_5335686_v5ForWebDing_0A930BF4_1533783034436_o7001c409n]) by e01l07394.eu6 at Thu, 09 Aug 2018 10:56:01 +0800
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2018 10:56:01 +0800
From: "徐小虎(义先)" <xiaohu.xxh@alibaba-inc.com>
To: mpls <mpls-bounces@ietf.org>, "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>
Reply-To: "徐小虎(义先)" <xiaohu.xxh@alibaba-inc.com>
Message-ID: <ed42ce65-7281-4c4b-b67f-0d50b86a6759.xiaohu.xxh@alibaba-inc.com>
X-Mailer: [Alimail-Mailagent revision 7][W4_5335686][v5ForWebDing][Safari]
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <78A2745BE9B57D4F9D27F86655EB87F93750CBB5@sjceml521-mbx.china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <78A2745BE9B57D4F9D27F86655EB87F93750CBB5@sjceml521-mbx.china.huawei.com>
x-aliyun-mail-creator: W4_5335686_v5ForWebDing_QvNTW96aWxsYS81LjAgKE1hY2ludG9zaDsgSW50ZWwgTWFjIE9TIFggMTBfMTJfNikgQXBwbGVXZWJLaXQvNjA0LjUuNiAoS0hUTUwsIGxpa2UgR2Vja28pIFZlcnNpb24vMTEuMC4zIFNhZmFyaS82MDQuNS42La
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=ALIBOUNDARY_16841_50782940_5b6bad41_23d3df"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/wnBO3qKB8HJSMmW617ZgUkiD-kY>
Subject: Re: [mpls] MPLS extension header
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Thu, 09 Aug 2018 02:56:09 -0000

Hi Haoyu,

I believe it's worthwhile to introduce an MPLS payload indicator into MPLS so as to support various MPLS payload types in a long run. However, I wonder whether the mechanism as described in (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xu-mpls-payload-protocol-identifier) has met this demand.

Best regards,
Xiaohu

------------------------------------------------------------------
From:Haoyu song <haoyu.song@huawei.com>
Send Time:2018年8月9日(星期四) 06:24
To:mpls@ietf.org <mpls@ietf.org>
Subject:[mpls] MPLS extension header


Dear all,
In IETF102 we presented the idea of MPLS extension header and received a lot of discussion. We have updated the draft to reflect the feedbacks we received.  
It seems most people agree that we need extension headers (EH) to support multiple emerging in-network services, but there could be debate on how to indicate the existence of the EHs.
In the document we provide our investigations and suggestions but we do want to see your opinion. Hopefully we can achieve a consensus before IETF103.   
Thank you in advance for your help!
https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-song-mpls-extension-header-01.txt
Best regards,
Haoyu

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email