Re: Pseudo-wires: uni-directional o bi-directional?

>>> A Session ID is a possible PW label. So, a L2TPv3 session is really a 
>>> L2TPv3 PW.
>>
>> You are confusing terms and concepts.
>> Don't confuse labels with sessions with traffic within a session.
>> They are all very different concepts.
> 
> 
> I don't understand. I think a L2TPv3 PW is a pseudo-wire which "PW 
> Label" is a "L2TPv3 Session ID". Why not?

Why not what? That question is not clear to me.

But note I didn't use the term "PW label". That is a term typically
used with MPLS and not all PWs are carried over MPLS.

So, let's clarify some terms: what do you call a "PW label"?
Because that term is not really used in L2TP terminology.

> Then, why is a L2TPv3 session not a "L2TPv3 PW"?, which would be the 
> difference?

Be careful using a term like "L2TPv3 PW". That term can have two
potential meanings: either a PW built using L2TPv3 services or
an L2TPv3 session carried over some sort of PW.
Which do you mean?

At any rate, the difference is a matter of layers.

L2TPv3 is used to build PWs, but not the other way around.

> And, finally, is a PW bidirectional, like a L2TPv3 Session?

That's a question what should be asked on the PWE3 WG.
This WG (l2tpext) concerns itself only with L2TP.

-Ignacio