The MPLS WG Archive

[Eric Rosen <erosen@cisco.com>]

Mark> I sent  some comments  in response  to the previous  last call  (?) in
Mark> April, 

Oh, that was a last call for accepting  it as a WG document, not a last call
for sending it to the IESG ;-)

Mark> which have not been addressed. 

My apologies,  I meant  to incorporate them  "in the  next rev", but  I just
dropped the ball ;-(

Mark> 1.  In section 2 there are protocol numbers 'X' and 'Y' called out.  I 
Mark> presume  these are to  be replaced  with values  assigned by  IANA.  I
Mark> don't  know what  the politics  are by  which values  get  assigned or
Mark> denied  but since the  'Y' value  for MPLS  multicast "is  for further
Mark> study" perhaps  IANA should  only be  asked for an  'X' value  at this
Mark> time.   I should  think a  request  for one  value is  more likely  to
Mark> succeed than a request for two.

I figure if we  ask for both, the worst that can happen  is that we only get
one, but we might as well try for both.  

On the  Tunnel MTU issue, you are  correct that the text  is confusing.  How
about: 
 
        In some cases, the tunnel head receives, for
        encapsulation, an IP packet, which it first encapsulates
        in MPLS and then encapsulates in MPLS-in-IP or
        MPLS-in-GRE.  If the source of the  IP packet is
        reachable from the tunnel head, and if the result of this
        encapsulation would be a packet whose size exceeds the
        Tunnel MTU, then the value which the tunnel head SHOULD
        use for the purposes of fragmentation and PMTU discovery
        outside the  tunnel is the Tunnel MTU value minus the
        size of the MPLS  encapsulation.

I've incorporated your other corrections.