The MPLS WG Archive

[Shahram Davari <Shahram_Davari@pmc-sierra.com>]

This is possible and very common. There is no need for any agreement or coordination.

-Shahram

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mpls-bounces@lists.ietf.org 
> [mailto:mpls-bounces@lists.ietf.org]On
> Behalf Of Leonardo Balliache
> Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2004 6:36 AM
> To: Mpls list
> Subject: [mpls] Label number mapping
> 
> 
> Hi, all.
> 
> Perhaps I'm missing something but I've got a question about mpls.
> 
> Should there be some previous agreement between lsr about 
> label numbers to 
> be mapped and flooded?
> If so, where the specs talk about this?
> 
> Have a look to the following scenario; let's suppose we are using 
> unsolicited ordered control:
> 
> 	a ------ x ------ y ------- b
> 
> 1.- x and y are mpls lsr.
> 2.- x is egress for a then it maps label 1 to fec a, install it for 
> forwarding and advertise this map to y.
> 3.- y is egress for b then it maps label 1 to fec b, install it for 
> forwarding and advertise this map to x.
> 4.- x tries to install mapping 1-b received from y.
> 5.- y tries to install mapping 1-a received from x.
> 6.- Then both lsr could have the same label "1" mapped to two 
> different 
> fecs: a and b.
> 
> Is this possible? Is there something I haven't understand yet?
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Leonardo Balliache
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@lists.ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
> 

_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls