Re: Mail regarding draft-zzhang-tsvwg-generic-transport-functions
Stewart Bryant <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.pwe3,gmane.ietf.mpls,gmane.ietf.bess |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
> On 11 Nov 2020, at 16:32, Jeffrey (Zhaohui) Zhang <[email protected]> wrote: > > Zzh> I see what you mean. Perhaps we can separate the one-octet “Next Header” from the existing IP “Next Header” space so that the first nibble is always 0000? That gives us 16 types of “Next Header” – or we only need to make sure the nibble is not 4 or 6 – that gives us more types. > > You should use 0000. This is the IP version number space. 4 and 6 are taken as IP. BIER sits on 3, PWs sit on 0 and 1 (for OAM), and of course there is a chance that INT might like invent another IP at some time in the future (a general note and nothing to do with NewIP). Now what I am not sure about is why you need a next header as this is not needed elsewhere in MPLS PWs. If you do, then I would suggest that 16 is likely too few. The standard MPLS method is to trigger processing from the label, so if you want to do other processing then why not allocate a new label so you can vector straight to the right packet handler. What I think you need is the existing PW frag design with the identification field appended. Then to advertise those propertied with the label. - Stewart _______________________________________________ Pals mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pals