The MPLS WG Archive

[Eric Rosen <erosen@cisco.com>]

Lou> The case I was thinking about is were there is an inner label that 
Lou> indicates VPN and an outer label that indicates an egress. 

What makes this  case problematic is that pushing on  these two labels would
be a  function of the Provider Edge  router, which is much  less likely than
the CPE to be separated by a low speed link from the backbone. 

If you  want your  draft to be  considered for  standards track, I  think it
should have  a much clearer statement  of its purpose,  maybe even something
like "not recommended for use on links faster than 9.6Kb", or something like
that.  And  a clear  statement that its  use is  optional.  That way  when a
potential  customer complains that  an implementation  is not  conformant to
standards  because it  doesn't use  single  hop compression  on its  gigabit
ethernet link, one can just refer the customer back to the document itself.