The MPLS WG Archive[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index] draft-ietf-mpls-diff-ext-07.txt
Hi, We don't restrict the implementations. Both could be done. However, if the tunneled packet belongs to a Diffserv signaled E-LSP, since we signal the EXP<=>PHB mapping, it might be difficult to do the first option that you mentioned. Regards, -Shahram > -----Original Message----- > From: Francis Arts [mailto:francis.arts@alcatel.be] > Sent: Saturday, November 25, 2000 4:30 AM > To: mpls@UU.NET > Subject: draft-ietf-mpls-diff-ext-07.txt > > > > Hello, > > I have a question concerning the > draft-ietf-mpls-diff-ext-07.txt draft. > > Section 2.6.2, p.13 of this draft states the following: > > "The Pipe Model is particularly appropriate to environments in which > the incoming interface of the LSP Ingress and the outgoing interface > of the LSP Egress are in Diff-Serv domains which use a common set of > Diff-Serv service provisioning policies and PHB definitions, while > the LSP spans one (or more) Diff-Serv domain(s) which use(s) a > different set of Diff-Serv service provisioning policies and PHB > definitions." > > > This statement could be interpreted in 2 ways. Which one is correct: > > 1) The 2 diff serv domains connected by the LSP use the same PHBs but > may use a different DSCP encoding of the PHB. If a different DSCP > encoding is used, a translation needs to be done at either end. > > 2) The 2 diff serv domains connected by the LSP use the same PHBs and > the same > DSCP encoding of the PHB. > > > > Thanks for your answer. > > Kind regards, > > Francis. > |
|