The MPLS WG Archive

[Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@cisco.com>]

         Did you not get our responses?

>Re-sending the mail I sent few days back. Authors, pls. respond.
>
>Prem
>
> >  -----Original Message-----
> > From:         Sharma, Prem
> > Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 1:11 PM
> > To:   'mpls@uu.net'
> > Subject:      some queries on mpls-ftn-mib-03
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I was trying to see if some consensus has been reached on the following
> > outstanding issues w.r.t. mpls-ftn-mib:
> > *     Keeping mapping of DSCP values to LSPs/Tunnels

         This exists in the current version.

> > *     Use of CIDR prefixes instead of Address ranges.

         This is supported by the existing MIB in that
you can use address prefix ranges.

> > *     Keeping IPv6 flow label also.

         There were no requests other than yours to add
this, so there was no consensus to add it.

> > Aforementioned pertain to the mplsFTNEntry in the MIB.


> > One more comment: I'll be better if the relation of this draft with
> > diffserv mib could be clarified too.

         Yes, we agreed to clarify the text in the MIB for this.
I also believe that text in the MIB exists which notes that
other packet marking/queuing can take place before the
FTN MIB is inserted into the processing chain.

         --Tom


> >
> > Thanks.
> > Prem