The MPLS WG Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS WG Archive>month:2002-May> msg00257



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]  
  [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index]

Basic LDP Question

  • From: Sukanta ganguly <sganguly@yahoo.com>
  • Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 11:06:13 -0700 (PDT)
  • Cc: Giles Heron <giles@packetexchange.net>, Shahram Davari <Shahram_Davari@pmc-sierra.com>, "'mpls@uu.net'" <mpls@UU.NET>, "'ppvpn@ppvpn.francetelecom.com'" <ppvpn@ppvpn.francetelecom.com>

Lars,
  I am not sure about the more straight forwardness
than an IP firewall, but I certainly agree to the
layering of labels allowing multiple predictive paths
that can be choosen quite dynamically which IP does
not allow.

  As a matter of fact I would actually like to know
your reasoning as far as the simplicity of straight
forwardness that you see on an MPLS based firewall,
which does not exists in the IP firewall. 

SG

--- Lars Eggert <larse@ISI.EDU> wrote:
> Yakov Rekhter wrote:
> >>1.  Efficient encapsulation of VPN traffic
> >>2.  Ability to run VPN on current hardware
> >>
> >>There are probably other reasons as well...
> > 
> > One of the "other reasons" is straightforward
> protection against packet 
> > spoofing.
> 
> More straightforward than an IP firewall?
> 
> Lars
> -- 
> Lars Eggert <larse@isi.edu>           USC
> Information Sciences Institute
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 2 application/x-pkcs7-signature
name=smime.p7s



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com