The MPLS-OPS Archive

["john smith" <johnsmith0302@hotmail.com>]

okie,

i dunno how u can  INTSERV models working with GRE

rewrite the GRE draft (and if u do please remove the inner protocols
stuff)..
finally look at it this way:
why aren't the labels unique end to end? why do we even need a inner and
outer label? (its like what GRE was otherwise)

lets assume that we know the last hop label, we ensure that the traffic
going to the PE will have the label as the last hop label...(draft kompella)

what do u need now..either an aggregate flow via "GRE" tunneling and
"diffserv in the GRE"

or you need to simply ensure that the LSP signalling protocol ensures that
the inner label is the "last label to the Pe from the P" and it can be done.
im sure that bit isnt too tough to be doing....

TED and stuff aahaa well :-) we ignore it for now.................. fine but
atleast optimise diffserv to as much as can be done......






----- Original Message -----
From: Robert Raszuk <raszuk@cisco.com>
To: john smith <johnsmith0302@hotmail.com>
Cc: MPLS-ops Mailing List <mpls-ops@mplsrc.com>
Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 1:46 PM
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: RE: [MPLS-OPS]: Route Distinguisher Questions


>
> > or a label in GRE?
>
> That is precisely what we do :). I hoped I explained it already ...
>
> We could do two things:
>
> A) VPN label in p2p GRE
> B) VPN label in p2mp GRE (mGRE)
>
> > there was a talk about inter-provider RSVP signalling..what about that?
>
> Depends who you ask ...:):) I personnely think that for interprovider
> pure IP/GRE would be much simpler then propagating /32s, labels or
> messing with RSVP-TEs.
>
> And usually simpler means better :).
>
> Cheers,
> R.
>
> > john smith wrote:
> >
> > by the way,
> > if BGP is generating the inner label...
> > why cant we use it as the "last label" to the PE rather than have a
label in
> > label or a label in GRE?
> >
> > isnt that possible too?
> >
> > coz we already know what the inner label is at both ends now....
> >
> > there was a talk about inter-provider RSVP signalling..what about that?
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: john smith <johnsmith0302@hotmail.com>
> > To: <raszuk@cisco.com>
> > Cc: MPLS-ops Mailing List <mpls-ops@mplsrc.com>
> > Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 1:19 PM
> > Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: RE: [MPLS-OPS]: Route Distinguisher Questions
> >
> > > hi Robert,
> > >
> > > seems we are on the same side in somethings... :-)
> > > inline.....
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Robert Raszuk <raszuk@cisco.com>
> > > To: john smith <johnsmith0302@hotmail.com>
> > > Cc: MPLS-ops Mailing List <mpls-ops@mplsrc.com>
> > > Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 10:14 AM
> > > Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: RE: [MPLS-OPS]: Route Distinguisher Questions
> > >
> > >
> > > > John,
> > > >
> > > > > How many bits does the RD field have?? :-o are they enuf to put an
AS
> > #
> > > in
> > > > > it? and make it globally unique?
> > > >
> > > > 8 bytes = 64 bits ... :).
> > >
> > > :o) so why did we ever make RT?
> > >
> > > >
> > > >    The RDs are structured so that every service provider can
administer
> > > >    its own "numbering space" (i.e., can make its own assignments of
> > > >    RDs), without conflicting with the RD assignments made by any
other
> > > >    service provider.  An RD consists of a two-byte type field, an
> > > >    administrator field, and an assigned number field.  The value of
the
> > > >    type field determines the lengths of the other two fields, as
well as
> > > >    the semantics of the administrator field.  The administrator
field
> > > >    identifies an assigned number authority, and the assigned number
> > > >    field contains a number which has been assigned, by the
identified
> > > >    authority, for a particular purpose.  For example, one could have
an
> > > >    RD whose administrator field contains an Autonomous System number
> > > >
> > > > Rosen & Rekhter              Informational
[Page 9]
> > > > RFC 2547                     BGP/MPLS VPNs                    March
1999
> > > >
> > > >    (ASN), and whose (4-byte) number field contains a number assigned
by
> > > >    the SP to whom IANA has assigned that ASN.  RDs are given this
> > > >    structure in order to ensure that an SP which provides VPN
backbone
> > > >    service can always create a unique RD when it needs to do so.
> > > >    However, the structuring provides no semantics. When BGP compares
two
> > > >    such address prefixes, it ignores the structure entirely.
> > >
> > > .............so u still need "RT" ??? (well yeah it has more bits than
RD
> > > ;-) )
> > >
> > > .......was it made for CoC and Multiple ASes, or was it made for
something
> > > else????
> > >
> > > and now that we maybe able to "filter on RD" since they will be
globally
> > > unique..why not put RT to a better use...any ideas how?
> > >
> > > ...............i see it having a greater significance... in terms of
> > > community scenarios.....
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > so we still have a label stack, the LDP gives u the LSP to the end
PE
> > > and
> > > > > the inner label to identify the VRF is passed by BGP?
> > > > > is this correct?
> > > >
> > > > If you use LDP yes - if you use IP for getting to your remote PE -
No.
> > > >
> > > > > now, how do we generate the inner label?
> > > >
> > > > Inner label (VPN label) is generated by BGP in any case.
> > >
> > > ..........agreed..draft kompella ppvpn i presume?
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > and in case we go across multiple service providers, how do we
handle
> > it
> > > in
> > > > > such scenarios?
> > > > >
> > > > > as now we would have a "outer label", an "inner label" and put the
> > > remote
> > > > > AS' router loopback into your IGP? how exciting!
> > > >
> > > > No need. If you use IP for transport of 2547 there is no outer label
and
> > > > you don't need to put your remote AS's loopacks into any IGP. Most
> > > > implementations I know can handle mutli level recursion just fine.
> > >
> > > ........ahha i presume GRE or IP-IP kind of encap?
> > >
> > > .......and how would you use those "nasty inner layer protocol bits"
inthe
> > > GRE header.,.why dont you just do away with them and put the MPLS
Label
> > > there?
> > >
> > > .......and then how will you do RSVP -TE (by the way does cisco
support
> > > TED)?
> > >
> > > .......and i mean is TED more that a "show" command ?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
>

-------
The MPLS-OPS Mailing List
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:  http://www.mplsrc.com/mplsops.shtml
Archive: http://www.mplsrc.com/mpls-ops_archive.shtml