From nobody Mon Nov 8 01:04:41 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pals@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pals@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B35393A0CA6; Mon, 8 Nov 2021 01:04:39 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.096 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.096 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 gmxteXxzgfJD; Mon, 8 Nov 2021 01:04:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wr1-x433.google.com (mail-wr1-x433.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::433]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 417763A0CA5; Mon, 8 Nov 2021 01:04:35 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr1-x433.google.com with SMTP id d5so25562047wrc.1; Mon, 08 Nov 2021 01:04:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to :date:cc:message-id:references:to; bh=tK+lJsPMipIaX2x5lV3MUbjlWi2EjxLETDK/r57fi9I=; b=fEf9tNI2LhMm6GWfJ7a/0ukxqlWFikLYLgHd7XoUzlE2RKZQkVK5mSqkggSnd8ZpwO nbL6dWO0pbQY9dBVcnf7TA2+UaC5ePhOF+Km+pQCXmZ/iGY9IoAmfFnj+92QbHXon+Gy ZWJ5M3WyA44Xfeszlw67W4rinH6nfOhexpzV7o/lBhJJtpalL3bCmZ3fmYhLb0J+usWh 5Rt4bySw57n4g+zHoISIQRS+zN2KlUj/iwM4XSQOBhfSERjr80MS0vJlWT8y4CRxCIY6 scyFivPjxtwoTKO3xG35HrmE1E6jt8VhBw8GSWAuxh+WmzcyjD9suTWZM0C/0Z6wy+nr zVNg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject :from:in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id:references:to; bh=tK+lJsPMipIaX2x5lV3MUbjlWi2EjxLETDK/r57fi9I=; b=8Lo7JUE5tcyOCWTUN9Jdae8ksr6Z40b5Wgd2yxsndiC4Gb+YTTHJWryV2C+Akshyde 8o24gv13np6q7r+Ickq/4wP+gw4CnqP/qRHeuvcn9Y1G4xj1jrdaPaK1Zw3MYA4xXC98 X5wOHxXoEAJpyM4jj1yUgKCz21I0nvKsE4d2jM+ONUa/+Rxleqibv44LvyLOoNnN5Ztj +4tF9WvgtPoaCeEn02JBUb8ExbLldVe5DqFQ+x67v/uwEl2baHEMEQ4etwt9o7Tmt8V6 iJ+AZPJdA1NdjcxPONdS4q3FQGI01OiniJebA53G+flJrfrsD5WniOSoMsQ5eLKoANb/ L+zw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533wfz6IHKH5DPS/TsJSPm23nzqDaILh90Bcc31GBRZSoXozDUpd dlXoTz1hMC7xjIGAW1i5b/AkOlGBJ3U= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxMyFexIoIEDcyV9TC84fEugWuFEabx+IHmzaVpYG9NzOgk7cXBW4K/4HMOf3OIAXibfYoJhw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:1841:: with SMTP id c1mr63693759wri.425.1636362272039; Mon, 08 Nov 2021 01:04:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtpclient.apple ([2a00:23c5:3395:c901:3de4:123:f39a:a422]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a1sm18664619wri.89.2021.11.08.01.04.31 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 08 Nov 2021 01:04:31 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-B1DB67C4-CA47-4CFB-9551-D5044F38E51B Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) From: Stewart Bryant In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2021 09:04:29 +0000 Cc: draft-gandhi-mpls-stamp-pw@ietf.org, mpls@ietf.org, pals@ietf.org, detnet@ietf.org Message-Id: <690E5F83-3E23-42C6-8A8C-6B14066CDDBE@gmail.com> References: To: Greg Mirsky X-Mailer: iPad Mail (19B74) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Pals] [Detnet] A question about draft-gandhi-mpls-stamp-pw X-BeenThere: pals@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Pseudowire And LDP-enabled Services dicussion list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2021 09:04:40 -0000 --Apple-Mail-B1DB67C4-CA47-4CFB-9551-D5044F38E51B Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I am inclined to wonder the same. If it is about not having an IP address to hand, I seem to recall that one m= ode of use over 0x21 was to use local host. Stewart Sent from my iPad > On 7 Nov 2021, at 21:01, Greg Mirsky wrote: >=20 > =EF=BB=BF > Dear Authors, > I've read the draft and would appreciate your clarification to my question= : > What benefits do you see in defining two new ACH types for STAMP protocol o= ver a PW? > I believe that there are no apparent advantages of using PW, i.e., without= IP/UDP headers, encapsulation compared to using IP/UDP. The latter can be e= asily done using ACH types 0x0021 and 0x0057 for IPv4 and IPv6 address famil= y respectively. >=20 > What do you think? >=20 > Regards, > Greg > _______________________________________________ > detnet mailing list > detnet@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet --Apple-Mail-B1DB67C4-CA47-4CFB-9551-D5044F38E51B Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I am inclined to wonder the same.

<= /div>
If it is about not having an IP address to hand, I seem to recall t= hat one mode of use over 0x21 was to use local host.

Stewart

Sent from my iPad
On 7 Nov 2021, at 21:01, Greg Mirsky <gregimi= rsky@gmail.com> wrote:

=EF=BB=BF
Dear Authors,
I've read the draft and would appreciate your clarifica= tion to my question:
  • What benefits do you see in defining t= wo new ACH types for STAMP protocol over a PW?
I believe that there= are no apparent advantages of using PW, i.e., without IP/UDP headers, encap= sulation compared to using IP/UDP. The latter can be easily done using ACH t= ypes 0x0021 and 0x0057 for IPv4 and IPv6 address family respective= ly.

What do you think?

Reg= ards,
Greg
_______________________________________________
detnet= mailing list
detnet@ietf.org
https://www.ie= tf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet
= --Apple-Mail-B1DB67C4-CA47-4CFB-9551-D5044F38E51B--