|
|
Choosing A Webhost: |
Re: Vpns vs explicit null label: msg#00164ietf.mpls
David> this sort of half-PHP is really the provence of the LSR that David> originated the label. Only consequence of such a spec change is the David> upstream LSR should not squawk or place limitations on such a label David> if received. When the egress node E sends an LDP message binding explicit null to a particular FEC, it is telling the penultimate node P that, under certain circumstances, when P receives an MPLS packet from some third node, P should swap the top label of that packet with explicit null. P will do this when the FEC corresponding to the incoming label of the packet is the same FEC to which E has bound explicit null. Strictly speaking E should only bind explicit null to a particular FEC if it somehow knows that any packets which P sees that correspond to that FEC will be carrying label stacks of no more than one label. In practice, though, it is difficult to make E obey this restriction. I think what you're saying is that if E gets a packet with explicit null at the top of the stack, it has gotten what it asked for, and should handle it in the obvious way. I agree with this, and I'd assumed that this is what would generally be done. But the spec never made this clear. So we've seen cases where E throws the packet away as malformed, and I think we've also seen cases where P throws the packet away rather than sending a "malformed" packet. These lead to lack of interoperability. I think we've also seen cases where P, when processing a packet with more than one label, will treat explicit null as if it had been implicit null; this at least is interoperable. So perhaps what should really be required is: - When the egress LSR pops off explicit null, it should attend to the IPv4/v6 type. Other nodes treat the two kinds of explicit null as equivalent. - When asked to put explicit null on the top of a label stack, one MAY do so, but one SHOULD treat explicit null as if it were implicit null. (Not sure about that "should".) - When creating a label stack with explicit null somewhere in the middle, one MAY put it there, but one SHOULD simply remove it.
|
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| Previous by Date: | A question regarding rsvp-te, Xiaoning He |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Vpns vs explicit null label, Eric Gray |
| Previous by Thread: | RE: Vpns vs explicit null label, David Allan |
| Next by Thread: | RE: Vpns vs explicit null label, David Allan |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
Free MagazinesCisco NewsReceive a free quarterly e-newsletter with exclusive articles on how Cisco IT uses its own products and solutions to enable the business. subscribe Systems Management News, the newspaper for IT systems administration and data center managers! Each issue of Systems Management News is chock-full of news and analysis to help you understand what's happening in your field. subscribe The Enterprise Newsweekly eWeek is the essential technology information source for builders of e-business. subscribe Oracle Magazine Oracle Magazine contains technology strategy articles, sample code, tips, Oracle and partner news, how to articles for developers and DBAs, and more. Oracle (NASDAQ: ORCL) is the world's largest enterprise software company. subscribe Total Telecom Total Telecom is "The Economist of the communications industry". subscribe |