Re: [mpls] Comments on draft-bocci-mpls-miad-adi-requirements

Tony Li <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.pwe3,gmane.ietf.mpls
Message-ID <[email protected]>

> On Mar 31, 2022, at 9:33 AM, Haoyu Song <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> bullet 4 receives two notes:
> I think it should be a requirement, not a recommendation
> I think that an LSR must not be able to insert any ancillary data. Only ingress LER inserts data.
> Why? IOAM trace will need to add data on LSR for sure.
> I guess here you actually mean new headers.  For this case, I think we need to discuss why we want to prohibit LSR to add new header. If we allow LSR to add new header, what principles of MPLS are violated? Does this add more flexibility or functionality to the network? I’d like to see more discussions before making such decisions which could have profound subsequence.
>  


I concur.

Generality and hierarchy suggest that we should be able to inject data and functions at arbitrary places.

Tony

_______________________________________________
Pals mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pals
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.