RE: VPLS model for L2VPN Framework document

At 08:47 AM 5/30/2003 +0100, [email protected] wrote:
>Ali
>
>  > Or we can say "SP untagged packets - e.g., BPDUs".
>
>I still don't think that the above gives enough clarification. Packets are
>only tagged between trunk ports. An operator may have access ports
>connecting to different management networks that belong to different VLANs,
>e.g. VLAN 100 for management application X, and VLAN 200 for management
>application Y. Now, both of these access ports will receive untagged SP
>packets, but they will be destined for different VLANs. Both sets of SP
>untagged packets could not be sent over the same 'untagged VPLS instance' as
>they belong to different VLANs.

If the access ports are .1q access ports, then bridge would only see tagged 
traffic from these two ports. If they are not .1q access ports, then the 
bridge can not differentiate between them and it gets sent over the control 
VPLS instance. Anyway, if we want to limit the control VPLS instance to 
only BPDUs, then we can state it as such; however, if we want to allow 
other control/management frames over it, then we don't need to be that 
explicit.

-Ali

-Ali


>Richard