Re: [PWE3] draft-yong-pwe3-enhance-ecmp-lfat-01.txt

I think that any discussion on redefining  the  TC bits needs to start 
in MPLS WG. If they are happy that it can be done without breaking 
anything the we can reserve the bits, but we do need to think through 
the implications (past and future) of applying different semantics to 
those bits.

- Stewart

Raymond Key wrote:
> Hi Lucy,
>
> You suggest in section 5 re-defining the three TC bits in the flow label. The FAT-PW draft defined the new flow label in the label stack and mentioned in its section 7.1. "... that the semantics of a label stack entry (LSE) as defined by [RFC3032] cannot be modified ..."
>
> Is it worthwhile to discuss with the FAT-PW authors about re-defining the TC bits in flow label as "reserved for per flow characteristics" in the FAT-PW draft?
>
> Raymond Key
>
>
>   
>> Yong Lucy <lucyyong@huawei.com> wrote:
>>
>> WG,
>>
>>  
>>
>> We have published draft-ietf-pwe3-enhance-ecmp-lfat-01.txt. It proposes 
>> an
>> enhanced ECMP method that performs differentiated treatments on small 
>> and
>> large flows and large/small flow indication on PW flow label. The method
>> significantly improves hash based load balance.
>>
>>  
>>
>> E-mail commons are welcome prior to IETF77 meeting.
>>
>>  
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Lucy Yong
>>
>>     
> _______________________________________________
> pwe3 mailing list
> pwe3@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3
>
>   