The MPLS WG Archive[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index] Query on draft-ietf-mpls-label-encaps
In message <9DC5E2ABE65BD54CA9088DA3194461D6010C99F1@BBY1EXM01>, Shahram Davari writes: > Hi Curtis, > > The egress node of an LSP, knows that it is the egress of that LSP. So the > penultimate node could basically swap the top label with any label (not just > 0, 2) and the egress LSR (knowing that it is egress point)could pop it. So > my questions are: > > 1) Why do we need explicit null labels? > 2) Why do we have two explicit null labels 0 and 2? > > Regards, > -Shahram Whether "we" need these depends on who "we" is. Some routers cannot forward at full line rate if they have to do a lookup to determin that they have to POP a label and then do a second lookup on the underlying protocol. These routers need to send label 0 or 3 for IPv4 and 2 or 3 for IPv6. If they would rather special case 0 and 2 in hardware and do the appropriate lookup, they can. I don't see that these do any harm. Just leaving label 3 in place as a signaling convention and dropping 0 and 2 would be OK by me. I don't see a compelling reason to drop them since supporting them is almost trivial. Curtis
|
|