The MPLS WG Archive

["Cucchiara, Joan" <JCucchiara@Brixnet.com>]

Hi,

The way we envisioned the generic label range table
would work is along with the interface stack, such
that there is a single (perPlatform) ifIndex at some point in the
stack, which represents a generic label range.  What you
are suggesting is a finer break down of this (I think).

The ifIndex which corresponds to a generic label range
would be used in the generic label range
table.  The ifStack would then lead to a physical port
for a specific generic label (which was actually one of
the earlier tables, but was subsequently removed from
the mib since the feedback we received was that reserving
a group of generic labels was what was important.)

If you want a break down (or mapping) of a specific generic
labels to a specific ifIndex (say an ifIndex which corresponds
to the shim layer), that does not appear in the MIB, because our
understanding of the generic label range was that it applies
to a perPlatform scenario. 

  -Joan


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Edward Harrison [mailto:eph@dataconnection.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2001 1:39 PM
> To: 'mohanvak@future.futsoft.com'; 'jcucchiara@brixnet.com'
> Cc: 'mpls@uu.net'
> Subject: RE: Question on Generic Label Range Table in LDP MIB
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I'd forgotten that the generic label range table was only 
> added in one of
> the more recent versions of the MIB. I guess this means that 
> this problem in
> the MIB has only been around since then.
> 
> Joan, have you any comments on this? Is there any chance of adding an
> additional index field to the mplsLdpEntityConfGenericTable to cover
> scenarios where two interfaces advertise the same label range 
> for the same
> LDP entity?
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Ed
> 
> --------------
> Ed Harrison
> Network Convergence Group
> Data Connection Ltd
> Tel:   +44 20 8366 1177       Fax: +44 20 8366 5084
> Email: eph@dataconnection.com Web:http://www.dataconnection.com
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mohan Varma K [mailto:mohanvak@future.futsoft.com]
> Sent: 07 February 2001 08:57
> To: Edward Harrison
> Cc: 'mpls@uu.net'
> Subject: RE: Question on Generic Label Range Table in LDP MIB
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,      
>      Yes, creation of row will be a problem if we go with the
>  assumption of the earlier ldp-mibs.
>  
>       As per ldp-mib 7 they have defined a generic label range 
>  on a per Interface level. 
>       If we ensure a slight different label range in configuration(
>  for eg   16-10000 (mplsLdpEntityConfGenericIfIndexOrZero 1),
>             17-10000 (mplsLdpEntityConfGenericIfIndexOrZero 2)
>  we have almost same labels available on each interface,which 
>  we don't have earlier.
>         
>       However if we want to create a row wth the similar label range 
>   we can have additional index to this table.
> 
> with regards
> Mohan Varma
>   
>         
>                         
> 
> Hi Joan,
> 
> I have a question regarding the use of the
> mplsLdpEntityConfGenericIfIndexOrZero object within the LDP MIB
> (draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mib-07.txt).
> 
> My understanding is that it is possible to have multiple 
> interfaces using
> the generic label space and that, typically, each of these 
> interfaces would
> advertise the same label ranges.
> 
> Furthermore, I thought that it was possible to have a single 
> (non-targeted)
> LDP Entity for the generic label range - this entity being 
> associated with
> all the interfaces using the generic label range.
> 
> If this is correct then I believe one ends up with a single row in the
> Generic Label Range Table which corresponds to more than one 
> interface - for
> each interface the LDP ID, Entity Index and Label Range will 
> all be the same
> as each interface uses the same LDP entity and shares the 
> same label range.
> 
> In this scenario what should the value of
> mplsLdpEntityConfGenericIfIndexOrZero be (as there are 
> multiple possible
> interface indices that are appropriate)? Should it be zero, 
> meaning the
> index is unknown, or should it correspond to one of the 
> interfaces for the
> Entity?
> 
> Thanks very much for your help,
> 
> Ed
> 
> ----------------
> 
> Ed Harrison
> Network Convergence Group
> Data Connection Ltd
> Tel:   +44 20 8366 1177       Fax: +44 20 8363 1468
> Email: eph@dataconnection.com Web:http://www.dataconnection.com
>