[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Closing the GELS Mailing List
Hi Dimitri,
beside the fact that there is an assumption on what
label means and how it is represented in data plane
This is also something we would expect to describe within
CCAMP although "what is a label" would come to us from
the data plane specification.
do i interpreet correctly your statement that if the specification
that CCAMP is going to receive from IEEE does not speak
about "label" and its encoding there will be no place to discuss
any "label processing" and "label distribution" protocol in IETF
- being domain-wide or link-local
I expect the IEEE specification to define the forwarding paradigm.
For example: Frames in 802.1Qay are forwarded based on the checksum value
carried in the frame.
I expect us to build a GMPLS solution that can be used to configure/install
that forwarding paradigm.
If (for example) the destination MAC is the forwarding trigger, and the
destination MAC is also intended to have genuine network-wide scope and
identify the recipient of the frame to the whole network, then the label is
(by definition) network-scoped.
in that case, isn't the .1Q specification outside scope of this effort
since not referring - as of today at least - to any "label" semantic as
part of the Ethernet frame header information field ?
No. That is like saying that TDM and lambda were out of scope for GMPLS
because their definitions didn't refer to labels.
The point is that a label is the identifier by which traffic on an interface
may be identified for forwarding. The data plane spec should indicate what
that identifier is, and we call that a label and have to pass it around in
signaling.
I have no idea whether that means that the .1Q spec is in scope or not.
A