Snipped, again

Yours irrespectively,

John


JD:  You clipped the remaining part of the sentence which reads :  “and that 
the value  advertised in the MPLS label field is to be treated as a three octet 
quantity to be placed directly in the VNI or tenant ID  field of a packet.”

There is no MUST or SHOULD associated with the four bits being reserved.  If it 
will make folks happier I can  reword the sentence to indicate that the 
advertised three octet label is nominally the VNID or Tenant ID but should be 
considered to be opaque.

SR: This works for me, if using the last four bits won't lead to problems with 
BGP software parsing the packet (won't setting S=0 confuse it?). To be clear, 
the text will state that the 24-bit VNID will be carried in an opaque manner in 
the 3-octet label field, right? Specifically, I'm looking for removing the 
language that says the last four bits are reserved.

JD:  Fine, I will make that change in the next version.  As Aldrin has been 
pointing out, there are a set of applications, one for each NLRI, that make use 
of a common BGP infrastructure.  The BGP infrastructure has no insight into 
what is carried a given NLRI.

_______________________________________________
nvo3 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3

Reply via email to