Cell Relay Archive[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index] Re: MPOA & LANE V1.0.
> Hi, > Dont you think that a minimal LES ver 1.0 is required to have these TLVs > sent across to the LECs. If the LES is version 1.0 it will truncate the LE > ARP REQUEST and RESPONSE frames to 108 bytes missing out the tlvs. So now we > are talking about manual configuration of the tlvs at the lec side. Sorry for being unclear. My statement was only on the LEC side. You are right that LES 1.0 could give a problem if the LES truncates LE_ARP_REQ and/or LE_ARP_RESP in forwaring these over control direct or distribute. But this depends on the implementation of LES 1.0. The LANE 1.0 spec only states that the LES should forward ARP_REQ (if not answering it) and ARP_RESP. The spec is not saying that the LES should drop ARP_REQ frames if the RESERVED field on offset 52 is not zero or truncate the frame after byte 108. I think good implementation practice in a LES 1.0 would be to forward ARP_REQ and ARP_RESP _unchanged_ thus not truncating LANE 2.0 TLVs. Btw. in the LANE 1.0 spec it is explicitly stated that the RESERVED fields (offset 52 and 76) should be ignored on receipt (by the LES). Johannes --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pan Dacom GmbH Training/Consulting Johannes Krohn Robert-Bosch-Str. 32 D-63303 Dreieich Tel.: +49-6103/932-137 Fax: +49-6103/932-400 Email: krohn@ffm.pandacom.de |
|