Subject: Re: [bess] [mpls] Closed -- Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-mpls-rfc3107bis

From: Lou Berger <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 16:52:13 -0400

Hi,

    I know this is a late comment, but feel free to view it as an early
IETF LC comment if you wish:-)

Section 5  seems to catalogue a fair number of options and allows for
incompatible implementations:

   These differences in the behavior of different implementations may
   result in unexpected behavior or lack of interoperability.  In some
   cases, it may be difficult or impossible to achieve the desired
   policies with certain implementations or combinations of
   implementations.

It would be really nice to have something (or some combination) at least
recommended to be implemented to ensure interoperability.  Do you think
it's possible to define such a recommendation, or do we just punt?
(Surely there is a defacto default/minimal mode already in the market!)

Thanks,
Lou

On 5/11/2017 12:45 PM, Eric C Rosen wrote:
> I have now posted draft-ietf-mpls-rfc3107bis-02.txt, which I believe 
> addresses the LC comments.
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>