On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 7:09 AM, Scott Brim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 7/3/08 7:00 PM, William Herrin allegedly wrote: >> >> As for MPLS, who wants to argue that MPLS -is-not- a map-encap protocol? >> Not me. > > There are some noticeable differences, mainly that the (current) > map-and-encap schemes use IP routing and forwarding as they are today. > There is no setup phase for encapsulating a packet, and a core > forwarder does not discriminate between an encapsulated packet and a > non-encapsulated packet.
Scott, Distribution of the routes to the decapsulation nodes is a setup phase radically different in the overview than distribution of an MPLS label? > With MPLS, forwarding depends on > pre-establishment of a path. Labels have no topological significance > and are not forwardable until the per-label forwarding behavior is > installed in the nodes along a path. They don't aggregate. As we're finding to our chagrin, neither to IP addresses. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William D. Herrin ................ [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004 -- to unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body. archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg
