The MPLS WG Archive[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index] Load balancing draft
Hi, One of the criticism for this draft was that it is designed to overcome Y.1711 limitation, in which a reserved label is used. As I mentioned in the meeting the MPLS-Ping also requires usage of an extra reserved label for non-IP carrying LSPs: "To test an LSP that carries non-IP traffic, before injecting ICMP and MPLS ping messages into the LSP, the IPv4 Explicit NULL label should be prepended to such messages." So this draft is equally applicable to MPLS-ping. Yours, Shahram
|
|