[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [L2tpext] [PWE3] An error in RFC 4446 "IANA Allocations for Pseudowire Edge to Edge Emulation (PWE3)"

Himanshu,
 
Thanks for your instant reply.
What I am concerned is:
1) PW type 0x000B is not defined in RFC 3032, it is defined in draft-ietf-l2tpext-pwe3-ip.
2) MPLS LSP encapsulated IP (as in RFC 3032) may not be the same as PW
    encapsulated IP (which may include a CW as described in RFC 4447)
3) The setup procedure of LSP and PW is a little different, and PW type field is
    only used in the latter case. Do we really set up a PW to carry IP or just an LSP?
So this reference is misleading IMO.
 
But I am very glad to know that this is indeed the PW type for IP, and some
active drafts are using this mechanism.
Thank you again for this information.
 
  Best Regards
Yuanlong Jiang
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 9:39 PM
Subject: RE: [PWE3] An error in RFC 4446 "IANA Allocations for Pseudowire Edge to Edge Emulation (PWE3)"

There are a couple of drafts in L2VPN WG that uses this PW type (0x000B),

such as http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-l2vpn-arp-mediation-12

So it is not an error or problem in the RFC 3032. It is meant to carry IP payload without any data link headers.

 

Himanshu

Force10 networks

 

 

 

 

 

 

From: pwe3-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:pwe3-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jiang Yuan-long
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 9:01 AM
To: pwe3 at ietf.org
Cc: l2tpext at ietf.org
Subject: [PWE3] An error in RFC 4446 "IANA Allocations for Pseudowire Edge to Edge Emulation (PWE3)"

 

Hi, all:


I came accross an error in RFC 4446 "IANA Allocations for Pseudowire

Edge to Edge Emulation (PWE3)".

 

In Sec 3.2, it says:
"   0x000B  IP Layer2 Transport                              [RFC3032]"

 

it should be:  
   0x000B  IP Layer2 Transport                        [draft-ietf-l2tpext-pwe3-ip]
  
The same problem also exists in web page version http://www.iana.org/assignments/pwe3-parameters.

I wonder how about the status of this expired WG draft, will any more work

continue on this document or just expired as it is? 
I also wonder whether we should define a PW type for IP payload so that

everything on PW is possible.
Any comments?
  
   Thanks,
Yuanlong Jiang