Re: An error in RFC 4446 "IANA Allocations for Pseudowire Edge to Edge Emulation (PWE3)"
<[email protected]> Tue, 18 Aug 2009 21:16:50 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.pwe3,gmane.ietf.l2tpext |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <2ECAA42C79676B42AEBAC11229CA7D0C04FB7659@E03MVB2-UKBR.domain1.systemhost.net> |
Hi Yuanlong Jiang, Where you said below: "I also wonder whether we should define a PW type for IP payload so that everything on PW is possible" This is precisely what a key consequence of MPLS-TP is, ie in the LDP spin of MPLS we had to define PWs (one reason being that LDP requires that IP traffic units can run native in the DP with MPLS traffic units), but given we can't have IP in the MPLS-TP DP and we can't have LDP mp2p merging constructs in MPLS-TP anyway (the latter point is all about resource management determinism) then the original driver for PWs is gone.....just a fact. So now everything is a PW and nothing is a PW....that is, we just have clients (any) of MPLS-TP. We still have a tricky issue with the S bit that is not fully understood IMO yet (S bit => sublayering, as opposed to true client/server layering), which is also related to the important topic of being able to do MPLSoverMPLS as a proper client/server relationship. So what you point out below will be the case in MPLS-TP anyway (though I'm not sure everyone is comfortable with the acceptance of this fact yet) regards, Neil ________________________________ From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jiang Yuan-long Sent: 18 August 2009 14:01 To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: [PWE3] An error in RFC 4446 "IANA Allocations for Pseudowire Edge to Edge Emulation (PWE3)" Hi, all: I came accross an error in RFC 4446 "IANA Allocations for Pseudowire Edge to Edge Emulation (PWE3)". In Sec 3.2, it says: " 0x000B IP Layer2 Transport [RFC3032]" it should be: 0x000B IP Layer2 Transport [draft-ietf-l2tpext-pwe3-ip] The same problem also exists in web page version http://www.iana.org/assignments/pwe3-parameters <http://www.iana.org/assignments/pwe3-parameters> . I wonder how about the status of this expired WG draft, will any more work continue on this document or just expired as it is? I also wonder whether we should define a PW type for IP payload so that everything on PW is possible. Any comments? Thanks, Yuanlong Jiang _______________________________________________ pwe3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3