The MPLS WG Archive

["Andrew G. Malis" <Andy.Malis@vivacenetworks.com>]

Dave,

Now that we're into layer 2 VPNs over MPLS, the FEC concept has certainly 
been generalized.  I now take it to be a filter that is applied to the PDU 
of the protocol being carried by MPLS (not necessarily just IP) in order to 
determine the label that should be imposed by the LER.  Is that any more 
precise?

BTW, you're absolutely right, thanks to E-LSPs and MP, it is possible that 
MPLS packets with the same label imposed by a particular LER may not 
receive the same forwarding treatment by the network.  But they WILL at 
least all end up at the same destination.

Cheers,
Andy

--------

At 8/28/2002 02:41 PM -0700, David Allan wrote:


>As folks are discussing progressing stuff to draft, I'll raise this as a nit
>with definitions in 3031.
>
>Section 2.2 states:
>-------------------
>forwarding equivalence class   a group of IP packets which are
>                                      forwarded in the same manner (e.g.,
>                                      over the same path, with the same
>                                      forwarding treatment)
>
>This has become confused as it is used in two senses:
>
>1) The forwarding capabilities of an LSP.
>
>2) The forwarding requirements of a packet.
>
>An LSP can implement a set of forwarding treatments (E-LSP), a group of IP
>packets of common FEC can get different treatment (e.g. ECMP) and different
>paths....and forwarding treatment seems to now simply mean common prefix.
>
>Is it perchance time to revisit and clean up the definition?
>
>comments?
>Dave