The MPLS WG Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS WG Archive>month:2007-Mar> msg00379



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

[mpls] mpls working groups last callondraft-ietf-mpls-ldp-typed-wildcard-00

  • From: "Metz, E.T. \(Eduard\)" <Eduard.Metz@tno.nl>
  • Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 18:13:53 +0200
  • Cc: Ross Callon <rcallon@juniper.net>, David Ward <dward@cisco.com>
  • Thread-Index: AcdwctlVhx6hYfNXSaSg7XeDsV11nwA2TTng
  • Thread-Topic: [mpls] mpls working groups last callondraft-ietf-mpls-ldp-typed-wildcard-00
  • X-Env-Sender: Eduard.Metz@tno.nl
  • X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by cell.onecall.net id l2SG6ws04958
  • X-Msg-Ref: server-2.tower-181.messagelabs.com!1175098434!2566065!1
  • X-Originating-IP: [134.221.2.2]
  • X-StarScan-Version: 5.5.10.7.1; banners=tno.nl,-,-
  • X-VirusChecked: Checked


A few comments / questions:

----
Is the intention of the Typed Wildcard FEC element to replace or to be
complementary to the existing Wildcard FEC type? Perhaps this could be
briefly clarified in the draft. While reading I wondered whether it is
possible to do same with the Typed Wildcard FEC as can be done with the
Wildcard FEC Type, ie if a Prefix Typed Wildcard FEC (as specified in
section 5) is followed by a Label TLV should be behavior be expected to
be same as that of the Wildcard FEC Type (e.g. in a Label release)?

----
Section 4:
   Receipt of a Label Request message with a FEC TLV containing a Typed
   Wildcard FEC Element is interpreted as a request to send a Label
   Mapping for all FECs of the type specified by the FEC Element type in
   the Typed Wildcard FEC Element encoding.

=> replace "FEC Element type" with "FEC type"? Assuming FEC type refers
to all the information carried in the in Typed WC FEC Element regarding
the FEC, not just the FEC Element type. FEC type also seems to be used
in other parts of the document.

----
The suggested FEC Type seems to be in use in already:
0x04        CR-LSP                              [RFC3212]

----
The draft specifies the Typed Wildcard FEC element for the Prefix FEC
type. Does this imply that for the other FEC types defined in the LDP
RFC (Wildcard and Host-address) typed wildcarding is not required (or
not allowed)?

cheers,
	Eduard 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Loa Andersson [mailto:loa@pi.se] 
> Sent: woensdag 28 maart 2007 15:11
> To: mpls@ietf.org
> Cc: Ross Callon; David Ward
> Subject: [mpls] mpls working groups last call 
> ondraft-ietf-mpls-ldp-typed-wildcard-00
> 
> Working Group,
> 
> this is to initiate a two week working group last call
> on the working group draft "LDP Typed Wildcard FEC".
> 
> The document will be found at:
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-typed-wildcard-00
> 
> Please review and sent your comments to the mailing list or
> directly to the working group co-chairs.
> 
> The working group last call will end EOB March 11 PDT.
> 
> Loa and George
> 
> -- 
> 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
> 

This e-mail and its contents are subject to the DISCLAIMER at http://www.tno.nl/disclaimer/email.html

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