The MPLS-OPS Archive[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index] Re: Linux implementation of MPLS
Lets end the debate (hopefully!!) :) Taking this from google: "Labelspaces define the scope of forwarding rules. If two interfaces of the same MPLS router belong to the same labelspace, then they apply the same set of forwarding rules to MPLS packets. For example, if interfaces ``2'' and ``4'' are part of the same labelspace, then two packets with the same label arriving one on interface ``2'' and the other on interface ``4'' will follow the same forwarding rule. On the other hand, if multiple interfaces do not belong to the same labelspace then the incoming MPLS packets follow different forwarding rules." This might be of help for understanding !!! Now, Faisal you seem to be right, different labelspaces would interfere with re-routing. cheers, Sudeep On Sat, 18 Sep 2004, Sudeep Goyal wrote: > >> But I think global single label space is good as in case of MPLS fast >> reroute and penultimate hop label popping, the MP can swap labels >> without knowing that the traffic is coming from bypass tunnel or from >> the primary tunnel (different interfaces). Recall fast reroute use >> label stacking. > > I am not sure, but wondering if different labelspaces would interfere with > the re-routing. > >> On the other hand per interface label space is good as it increases >> the number of labels that can be used by a router. > > Makes sense! > > >> Once again as well as I know both exist in theory, side by side and >> ideally should be supported by any implementation. >> Check if you can specify labelspace to null and it work ?? > > In the implentation, if labelspace is set to -1 it stops working else when > the global labelspace is set to 0 (or anything), it works without any fuss. > Haven't tried about null labelspace yet. > > > > > >> Thanks >> Faisal Aslam >> >> On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 21:28:37 +0530 (IST), M.V. Padmini >> <padmini@genie.iitd.ernet.in> wrote: >>> >>> We are in the process of implementing a Test bed for MPLS using linux >>> boxes. Having gone through the mplsadm literature, they seem to be using >>> two parameters (label, labelspace) to be associated with each Interface >>> for an FEC. The labelspace is supposed to identify the interface (from >>> which it came) where the labels could be same (labels coming from >>> different interfaces). >>> >>> Is there a need to do this? If you enforce the uniqueness of the label >>> wrt to a FEC, dont u think that there is no requirement for a labelspace. >>> Am i missing something? >>> >>> Thanks in advance. >>> >>>> Abhishek Mittal wrote: >>>>> 6> Fix up the MTU size >>>> >>>> After upgrading to a newer IOS on the Catalyst yesterday, I just added >>>> MPLS IP to the 12k router again --- works fine now (with 1512 as MTU on >>>> all used interfaces) ... >>>> >>>> -gg >>>> >>>> ------- >>>> The MPLS-OPS Mailing List >>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://www.mplsrc.com/mplsops.shtml >>>> Archive: http://www.mplsrc.com/mpls-ops_archive.shtml >>> >>> ____________________________________________ >>> ERNET Project >>> Dept. of Computer Science and Engineering >>> IIT Delhi >>> New Delhi - 110 016 >>> >>> Phone: +(91)-11-2659 6009 >>> >>> ------- >>> The MPLS-OPS Mailing List >>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://www.mplsrc.com/mplsops.shtml >>> Archive: http://www.mplsrc.com/mpls-ops_archive.shtml >>> >> >> ------- >> The MPLS-OPS Mailing List >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://www.mplsrc.com/mplsops.shtml >> Archive: http://www.mplsrc.com/mpls-ops_archive.shtml >> > > -- When a great leader's work is done, people say "we did it ourselves". -Tao ------- The MPLS-OPS Mailing List Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://www.mplsrc.com/mplsops.shtml Archive: http://www.mplsrc.com/mpls-ops_archive.shtml
|
|