Hi all,

The SPRING SR use case draft 
(http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-filsfils-rtgwg-segment-routing-use-cases-02) 
has explicitly expressed the need for load-balancing MPLS traffic in the SPRING 
domain.

[RFC6790] has defined a method to load balance MPLS traffic flows using Entropy 
Labels (EL). According to the specification as defined in [RFC6790], an ingress 
LSR cannot insert ELs for packets going into a given tunnel unless an egress 
LSR has indicated via signaling that it can process ELs on that tunnel.  
Therefore [RFC6790] defines the signaling of this capability (a.k.a Entropy 
Label Capability - ELC) via existing label distribution protocols( i.e., LDP, 
RSVP and BGP). However, in the SPRING domain, the above signaling mechanisms 
are inadequate since label distribution would be done via link state Interior 
Gateway Protocols (IGP) (i.e., IS-IS and OSPF) instead of the existing label 
distribution protocols( i.e., LDP, RSVP and BGP).

This draft 
(http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xu-mpls-el-capability-signaling-igp-00) 
describing mechanisms to signal the ELC using OSPF and ISIS has been presented 
at SPRING and MPLS WG during the last IETF meeting. According to SPRING 
co-chairs' suggestions, this draft has been separated into two drafts: one is 
IS-IS specific (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xu-isis-mpls-elc-00), the 
other is OSPF specific (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-xu-ospf-mpls-elc-00). 
Any comments on these two drafts are welcome.

Best regards,
Xiaohu


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

Reply via email to