The MPLS WG Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS WG Archive>month:2004-Oct> msg00044



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

[mpls] Re: Liaison from MPLS & Frame Relay Alliance on RFC 3036Proposed Revisions - place holder response and call for discussion

  • From: Loa Andersson <loa@pi.se>
  • Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 13:35:43 +0200
  • Cc: statements@ietf.org, rcheruku@cisco.com, mpls@ietf.org
  • User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040803

Alexa,

we have received this liasion and plan to give a more formal response,
after consulting the working group.

Working group,

based on the liasion from MPLS FR Alliance I've asked Ina to leave the
Host FEC in an updated version (Internet Draft) of the LDP Specification
tht we hope will be published beforre the cut off for the upcoming
meeting in Washington.

At the same time I would like to initiate a discussion on the proper
actions for the LDP protocol. Especially since the previous discussion
on removing the Host FEC was pretty much a show of consensus.

/Loa

Alexa Morris wrote:
> This email is being sent on behalf of Rao Cherukuri, rcheruku@cisco.com. 
> 
> Dear George, Loa and Ina:
> 
> A recent message on the MPLS WG mailing list
> (http://www.cell-relay.com/mhonarc/mpls/2004-Sep/msg00043.html) has
> suggested changes to RFC 3036 ("LDP Specification") and called for comments
> on the proposed changes.  One of the proposed changes is to deprecate the
> use of the Host Address FEC TLV.  Two Implementation Agreements published by
> the MPLS & Frame Relay Alliance (MFA), "MPLS Proxy Admission Control
> Definition" and "MPLS Proxy Admission Control Protocol", MFA.6.0.0 and
> MFA.7.0.0
> (http://www.mplsforum.org/tech/mpls-proxy-admission-control-definition-ia.pd
> f and
> http://www.mplsforum.org/tech/mpls-proxy-admission-control-protocol-ia.pdf)
> make use of the Host Address FEC TLV.  MPLS Proxy Admission Control provides
> a bandwidth-based reservation/admission facility for MPLS networks.  There
> are implementations of this protocol in progress.
> 
> While the proposed changes make a Prefix FEC TLV with a 32-bit mask
> equivalent to a Host Address FEC TLV, adopting the Prefix FEC TLV would
> require changes to approved and published MFA documents, and changes to the
> implementations.  Also, since MPLS Proxy Admission Control only uses host
> addresses, using the Prefix FEC TLV would necessitate an additional check
> that the prefix was always 32 bits.  Therefore, the MFA kindly requests that
> the Host Address FEC TLV not be deprecated, and that it continues to be
> supported in future revisions of LDP.
> 
> In RFC 3036, there is a semantic difference between a Host Address and a
> prefix with length 32.  The new version proposes to remove the semantic
> difference.  This is not a problem for the MPLS Proxy Admission Control; we
> are just requesting that the Host Address codepoint not be deprecated.
> 
> Please advise us as soon as possible about the decision on this issue.
> 
> Cordially,
> Rao Cherukuri
> MPLS & Frame Relay Alliance
> Technical Committee Chair
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Loa Andersson

Principal Networking Architect
Acreo AB                           phone:  +46 8 632 77 14
Isafjordsgatan 22                  mobile: +46 739 81 21 64
Kista, Sweden                      email:  loa.andersson@acreo.se
                                            loa@pi.se

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