I don't think that's a good idea because depending upon their position in the stack, these labels may not be at the bottom of the stack.
Yours Irrespectively, John > -----Original Message----- > From: BESS <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Zhuangshunwan > Sent: Monday, October 15, 2018 9:02 PM > To: Jakob Heitz (jheitz) <[email protected]>; BESS <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [bess] Encoding a 20 bit label in a 24 bit field. > > It is good to make this explicit. This ambiguity has led to some unnecessary > interworking problems. > > Should we also need to explicitly define the "bottom of stack" bit in the low- > order bit of the 3-octet label field? > > Thanks, > Shunwan > > -----Original Message----- > From: BESS [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jakob Heitz (jheitz) > Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2018 4:21 AM > To: BESS <[email protected]> > Subject: [bess] Encoding a 20 bit label in a 24 bit field. > > We have proposed the following erratum for RFC 7432. > > Opinions? > > Regards, > Jakob. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: RFC Errata System <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, October 12, 2018 12:37 PM > To: Ali Sajassi (sajassi) <[email protected]>; [email protected]; > [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected]; [email protected]; Giles Heron > (giheron) <[email protected]>; [email protected] > Cc: Krishnamoorthy Arumugham (karumugh) <[email protected]>; > [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7432 (5523) > > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7432, "BGP MPLS- > Based Ethernet VPN". > > -------------------------------------- > You may review the report below and at: > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.rfc- > 2Deditor.org_errata_eid5523&d=DwICAg&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeM > K-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=CRB2tJiQePk0cT-h5LGhEWH- > s_xXXup3HzvBSMRj5VE&m=IvOdDW_zoH5heXCCcs7ke0vmlQ0Hm1yCi17llZn > BdsY&s=n_iX5KAK2InG-bgMnZHO3o4PH9UZmYKVtes9H7-vA1E&e= > > -------------------------------------- > Type: Technical > Reported by: Krishnamoorthy Arumugham <[email protected]> > > Section: 7 > > Original Text > ------------- > Clarifications to following sub-sections: > Section 7.1 > Section 7.2 > Section 7.5 > > > Corrected Text > -------------- > Section 7.1: > Add below text to the section 7.1 regarding the encoding of MPLS label: > > "The value of the 20-bit MPLS label is encoded in the high-order 20 bits of > the > 3 bytes MPLS Label field." > > Section 7.2: > Add below text to the section 7.2 regarding the encoding of both the MPLS > label fields: > > "The value of the 20-bit MPLS label is encoded in the high-order 20 bits of > the > 3 bytes MPLS Label field for both MPLS Label1 and MPLS Label2." > > Section 7.5: > Add below text to the section 7.5 regarding the encoding of ESI Label fields: > > "The value of the 20-bit MPLS label is encoded in the high-order 20 bits of > the > ESI Label field." > > > Notes > ----- > MPLS label is a 20-bit value and is stored in a 3 bytes field in a packet. > The 20- > bit MPLS label value is generally stored in higher order 20 bits of the 3 byte > label field. The exact encoding to be followed for storing MPLS label values > are not explicitly mentioned in the RFC 7432 under section 7.1, 7.2 and 7.5 > for different types of EVPN routes. This lead to ambiguity in different > implementations. Hence a clarification is required. > > Instructions: > ------------- > This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please use > "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or rejected. When a > decision is reached, the verifying party can log in to change the status and > edit the report, if necessary. > > -------------------------------------- > RFC7432 (draft-ietf-l2vpn-evpn-11) > -------------------------------------- > Title : BGP MPLS-Based Ethernet VPN > Publication Date : February 2015 > Author(s) : A. Sajassi, Ed., R. Aggarwal, N. Bitar, A. Isaac, J. > Uttaro, J. > Drake, W. Henderickx > Category : PROPOSED STANDARD > Source : Layer 2 Virtual Private Networks > Area : Routing > Stream : IETF > Verifying Party : IESG > > _______________________________________________ > BESS mailing list > [email protected] > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https- > 3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_bess&d=DwICAg&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Sc > bfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=CRB2tJiQePk0cT-h5LGhEWH- > s_xXXup3HzvBSMRj5VE&m=IvOdDW_zoH5heXCCcs7ke0vmlQ0Hm1yCi17llZn > BdsY&s=xbhjuaPYmhE7YZHdrs0qRQmpbqzoxbsm12LoU1YI5O8&e= > > _______________________________________________ > BESS mailing list > [email protected] > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https- > 3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_bess&d=DwICAg&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Sc > bfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=CRB2tJiQePk0cT-h5LGhEWH- > s_xXXup3HzvBSMRj5VE&m=IvOdDW_zoH5heXCCcs7ke0vmlQ0Hm1yCi17llZn > BdsY&s=xbhjuaPYmhE7YZHdrs0qRQmpbqzoxbsm12LoU1YI5O8&e= _______________________________________________ BESS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
