hi robert, On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 08:21:38PM +0200, Robert Raszuk wrote: | Hi, | | Two comments on this document. | | | Question: | | Assume there is label binding received for a given FEC from/by | multiple protocols. Which one should be chosen by the LSR to be used | in data plane? Choosing wrong one may jeoparadise the hope of | stitching.
i'd assume that an implementation supporting multiple label-distribution protocols, has an internal tie-breaking scheme and install LSPs for a fiven FEC only from the highest ranking protocol. | Is consistent manual configuration across multiple LSRs an answer ? possibly; - see below; | If so document should mention that. Otherwise analogy of admin | distance for FECs should be proposed. explicitly mentioning that there is a plurality of label-binding protocols seems unecessary to me. you are right insofar as rfc3031 does *not* mention a tie-breaking amon protocols and yet there are implemntations who support more than one concurrent label-distribution protocol. | Example: Is FEC distributed by OSPF more important then FEC | distributed by targetted LDP session in the same OSPF domain ? that is an implementation choice; hopefully the administrative preference is user configurable. | On the other hand if this case is considered an error a corresponding | error handling section may be required. | | | Recommendation: | | s/distirbution/distribution/ | | | Best regards, | R. | | | On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 7:37 PM, Yakov Rekhter <[email protected]> wrote: | > Alvaro and John, | > | > The authors of draft-gredler-spring-mpls-05.txt would like | > to ask SPRING WG to accept this draft as SPRING WG document. | > | > Yakov. | > ------- Forwarded Message | > | > Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 10:33:51 -0700 | > From: <[email protected]> | > To: <[email protected]> | > Subject: I-D Action: draft-gredler-spring-mpls-05.txt | > | > | > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. | > | > | > Title : Supporting Source/Explicitly Routed Tunnels via Stack | > ed LSPs | > Authors : Hannes Gredler | > Yakov Rekhter | > Luay Jalil | > Sriganesh Kini | > Xiaohu Xu | > Filename : draft-gredler-spring-mpls-05.txt | > Pages : 17 | > Date : 2014-05-16 | > | > Abstract: | > This document describes how source/explicitly routed tunnels could be | > realized using stacked Label Switched Paths (LSPs). | > | > This document also describes how use of IS-IS/OSPF as a label | > distribution protocol fits into the MPLS architecture. | > | > | > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: | > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gredler-spring-mpls/ | > | > There's also a htmlized version available at: | > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gredler-spring-mpls-05 | > | > A diff from the previous version is available at: | > http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-gredler-spring-mpls-05 | > | > | > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission | > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. | > | > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: | > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ | > | > _______________________________________________ | > I-D-Announce mailing list | > [email protected] | > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce | > Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html | > or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt | > | > ------- End of Forwarded Message | > | > _______________________________________________ | > spring mailing list | > [email protected] | > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring | | _______________________________________________ | spring mailing list | [email protected] | https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring _______________________________________________ spring mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
