Re: [Detnet] A question about draft-gandhi-mpls-stamp-pw
Stewart Bryant <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.pwe3,gmane.ietf.mpls |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
I am inclined to wonder the same. If it is about not having an IP address to hand, I seem to recall that one mode of use over 0x21 was to use local host. Stewart Sent from my iPad > On 7 Nov 2021, at 21:01, Greg Mirsky <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Dear Authors, > I've read the draft and would appreciate your clarification to my question: > What benefits do you see in defining two new ACH types for STAMP protocol over a PW? > I believe that there are no apparent advantages of using PW, i.e., without IP/UDP headers, encapsulation compared to using IP/UDP. The latter can be easily done using ACH types 0x0021 and 0x0057 for IPv4 and IPv6 address family respectively. > > What do you think? > > Regards, > Greg > _______________________________________________ > detnet mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet _______________________________________________ Pals mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pals