The MPLS WG Archive

[Curtis Villamizar <curtis@avici.com>]

In message <393444F5.F0150C97@marconi.com>, David Charlap writes:
> Eric Rosen wrote:
> > 
> > Please note  that routers with ATM  cards are not  ATM switches.
> > Therefore, routers with  ATM cards would not  be expected to use the
> > encodings defined for ATM switches.  If two routers are connected to
> > each other via an ATM VC, then of course they use the generic MPLS
> > encapsulation when sending labeled packets over that VC, NOT the
> > ATM-specific MPLS encapsulation.
> 
> Which deliberately makes the interface incompatible with an ATM switch
> running MPLS code.

That's OK?  ;-)  It's actually not a deliberate incompatibility.  It
has not been expressed as a customer requirement, at least for our
customer base.

> Why in the world would you want to use an ATM interface if it is
> incompatible with ATM switches?

Transition from legacy ATM backbones in which the ATM switches just
provide VCs and don't know about MPLS.

Curtis