The MPLS WG Archive

[Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>]

Shahram,
         I thing the issue is the case where an LSP spans DS and non-DS LSRs.

Lou

At 08:58 AM 7/21/00 -0700, Shahram Davari wrote:
>Lou, George,
>
>Section 5.6 of the draft focuses ONLY on the Diffserv LSRs. It requires the
>Diffserv LSRs to ignore the COS field and just use it as an indication of
>not  reserving BW.
>
>But this doesn't preclude the use of COS field by non-Diffserv LSRs.
>Therefore you could still have non Diffserv LSRs in the same network and you
>can use the COS field for their non-Diffserv behavior. However, this is up
>to the network operator to make sure that a non-Diffserv LSP spans only
>non-Diffserv routers.
>
>So in summary this draft is not addressing non-Diffserv LSRs, and does not
>preclude the use of them, provided LSPs are setup properly.
>
>Regards,
>-Shahram
>
>
>
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Lou Berger [mailto:lberger@labn.net]
> >Sent: Friday, July 21, 2000 8:39 AM
> >To: George Swallow
> >Cc: mpls@UU.NET
> >Subject: Re: Two last calls (draft-ietf-mpls-diff-ext-06.txt)
> >
> >
> >George,
> >         I still believe the draft doesn't cover the cases
> >where there are
> >non-DS and DS LSRs in the same network.  I raised this issue
> >in February,
> >see list archive for 2/8 - 2/10, and briefly at the last WG
> >session.  My
> >understanding from the authors was that they just didn't
> >belive this case
> >was valid and therefore didn't need to be addressed in the
> >draft.  Given
> >that draft-lefaucheur-diff-te-reqts-00.txt raises the same issue (in
> >section 3), I think the diff-ext draft should be fixed to
> >allow for non-DS
> >and DS LSRs in the same network.
> >
> >Lou
> >
> >PS As mentioned back on 2/8, I believe one trivial solution is
> >to require
> >the use of the DiffServ Object/TLV for all E-LSPs, where use of
> >preconfigured EXP<-->PHB mappings is indicated by either (pick
> >one) no map
> >parameters or a single map parameter set to all zeros.
> >Another solution is
> >to use the one proposed in
> >draft-lefaucheur-diff-te-ext-00.txt, although it
> >does use a new object that could just be merged with the
> >DiffServ Object.
> >
> >At 12:08 PM 7/19/00 -0400, George Swallow wrote:
> >>This message begins a last calls on:
> >>
> >>   draft-ietf-mpls-diff-ext-06.txt and
> >>   draft-ietf-mpls-rsvp-lsp-tunnel-06.txt
> >>
> >>The last calls will end on July 26 midnight GMT.  Comment are limited
> >>to the deltas between these and their respective prior drafts.
> >>
> >>With regard to the RSVP-TE draft, the recent comments to the list are
> >>accepted as last call comments and need not be repeated.
> >>
> >>...George
> >>
> >>======================================================================
> >>George Swallow       Cisco Systems                   (978) 244-8143
> >>                      250 Apollo Drive
> >>                      Chelmsford, Ma 01824
> >