The MPLS WG Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS WG Archive>month:2000-Dec> msg00388



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]  
  [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index]

Concerns regarding the numerous layer violations in base MPLS drafts

  • From: Curtis Villamizar <curtis@workhorse.fictitious.org>
  • Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 10:03:59 -0500
  • cc: Kireeti Kompella <kireeti@juniper.net>, curtis@avici.com, mpls@UU.NET


In message <4.3.2.7.2.20001220091737.00cded70@pilgrim.cisco.com>, Dan Tappan wr
ites:
> 
> Right now Kireeti is feeling gored because he wants to transfer L2 packets 
> over IPv4 LSPs, and doesn't want to worry about IPv4 procedures.

If (big "if") that were the case, then Kireeti should either 1) use a
different L3PID, not IPv4, so the midpoints and the egress get it
right, or 2) put an IP header on the encapsulated packets, then it is
IPv4 and all is fine.

Personally I prefer 2) because it would allow non-MPLS hops near the
edges of the provider.  It would also make the IESG happier if that's
a consideration.

Curtis

btw- I don't think you've accurately guessed Kireeti's motives on this.