Re: [trill] FGL "safe" mode in fine labels Thu, 21 March 2013 00:08 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id F231411E8110 for <>; Wed, 20 Mar 2013 17:08:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4KLmahBDf4SF for <>; Wed, 20 Mar 2013 17:08:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8947211E810E for <>; Wed, 20 Mar 2013 17:08:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by with ESMTP id r2L0836R053310 for <>; Wed, 20 Mar 2013 17:08:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (SquirrelMail authenticated user by with HTTP; Wed, 20 Mar 2013 17:08:03 -0700
Message-ID: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 17:08:03 -0700
User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.20
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Importance: Normal
Subject: Re: [trill] FGL "safe" mode in fine labels
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Developing a hybrid router/bridge." <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 00:08:04 -0000

 To be honest I had no problem understanding this draft. I am far from the
technical guru of switches as a few of you can testify. Yet, this draft
was very clear to me. I understood that a switch could do four possible
things with a FGL packet.
1. It understands it, does what the packet says, and passes it on
2. It doesn't understand it, but passes it on to another switch that does
3. It drops the packet because it doesn't understand it
4. It barfs

To me number one was an FGL capable switch. Number two was an FGL safe
switch.  Number three isn't useful and won't be considered safe in getting
the packet across the network. Number four was not safe under any

I wish to thank the writers for taking the time to include enough
information such that someone like me can read these specifications and
understand them. I know it takes a lot more of your time to do so and I
really appreciate it.
thanks again