[mpls] 答复: 答复: MPLS WG last call on draft-ietf-mpls-in-udp-03.txt

[Xuxiaohu <[e-mail]>]

Hi Sri,

Since you don’t see how that draft (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-yong-l3vpn-nvgre-vxlan-encap-00) helps, I’m curious to know why you had intentionally mentioned draft-quinn-vxlan-gpe before. Have you found any significant difference between them?

Best regards,
Xiaohu

发件人: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] 代表 Sriganesh Kini
发送时间: 2013年9月26日 7:14
收件人: Xuxiaohu
抄送: Ross Callon; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
主题: Re: [mpls] 答复: MPLS WG last call on draft-ietf-mpls-in-udp-03.txt

Hi Xu,

I read the other draft you pointed to and I don't see how that helps. What I had said earlier was that having a protocol-id in a header following the UDP header but before the user payload (in this draft the MPLS packet is the user payload) keeps the design generic and any protocol (not just MPLS applications) can then use such an encapsulation. Standardizing UDP port numbers to denote protocol types consumes the port number space and is unnecessary. Another important point is that developing OAM using a header after the UDP hdr but before the user-payload is easier.

- Sri

On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 7:00 PM, Xuxiaohu <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
Hi Sri,

It’s no problem provided that anybody was willing to use VXLAN-GPE to replace the existing MPLS-based applications such as L2 or L3 VPN services. Furthermore, there is another choice for VXLAN extension other than VXLAN-GPE, which has been described in http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-yong-l3vpn-nvgre-vxlan-encap-00. I’m willing to hear your further comments on the comparison of these two options for VXLAN extension (Maybe MPLS WG is not a suitable place to talk about this topic).

Xiaohu

发件人: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> [mailto:[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>] 代表 Sriganesh Kini
发送时间: 2013年9月24日 3:40
收件人: Xuxiaohu
抄送: Ross Callon; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
主题: Re: [mpls] 答复: MPLS WG last call on draft-ietf-mpls-in-udp-03.txt

Hi Xu,

The existing encapsulations you pointed out were defined a long time ago. Whereas the other two are just being proposed now. Moreover if we follow this approach it will require standardizing UDP port numbers for each new protocol to encap into UDP.

- Sri

On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 11:02 PM, Xuxiaohu <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
Hi Sri,

发件人: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> [mailto:[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>] 代表 Sriganesh Kini
发送时间: 2013年9月21日 7:06
收件人: Ross Callon
抄送: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
主题: Re: [mpls] MPLS WG last call on draft-ietf-mpls-in-udp-03.txt

There is no reference cited for the "MPLS-in-IP" encapsulation.

[Xiaohu] MPLS-in-IP and MPLS-in-GRE are actually specified in the same RFC that is RFC4023.

What is the applicability of this encapsulation compared to the generalized mechanism in draft-quinn-vxlan-gpe ?

[Xiaohu] The applicability of this encapsulation is the same as the existing IP-based encapsulations for MPLS (e.g., MPLS-in-GRE).

Best regards,
Xiaohu

- Sri

On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Ross Callon <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
Working Group,

This is to start Working Group last call on  draft-ietf-mpls-in-udp-03.txt

Please send your comments to the mpls working group mailing list ([e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>).

Please send both technical comments, and (if you are happy with the document as is)
also send indications of support.

There is one IPR claim that applies to this draft, which can be seen at:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1941/

The coauthors and contributor have indicated that they don’t know of any other
IPR applicable to this draft. If anyone else in the working group is aware of IPR
claims against this draft, the time to disclose that is now.

This working group last call will end on September 27, 2013.

Ross
for the wg co-chairs


_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls


_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls


_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls