RE: spc connections

[John Drake <jdrake@calient.net>]

Title: [전체회신] Re: [ AuA¼E¸½A ] spc connections

Lyndon,

 

This will be my last post on this topic.

 

I helped write RFC3471 and RFC3473, and SPC support was always an integral part of them, as Adrian's note informed  you.

 

If you are referring to your original question on this topic, I think the proper response is that it should be blindingly obvious to the informed reader that the egress node doesn't have to put the explicit label for the next hop into a Label Set in the outgoing Path message, because there is no outgoing Path message. 

 

Thanks,

 

John

-----Original Message-----
From: Ong, Lyndon [mailto:LyOng@Ciena.com]
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 12:01 PM
To: John Drake; 'yhwkim@etri.re.kr'; jonathan.sadler@tellabs.com
Cc: adrian@olddog.co.uk; kireeti@juniper.net; ccamp@ops.ietf.org
Subject: RE: spc connections

 

-----Original Message-----
From: John Drake [mailto:jdrake@calient.net]
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 11:45 AM
To: Ong, Lyndon; 'yhwkim@etri.re.kr'; jonathan.sadler@tellabs.com
Cc: adrian@olddog.co.uk; kireeti@juniper.net; ccamp@ops.ietf.org
Subject: RE: spc connections

 

Overlay deals again with signaled interfaces

rather than SPC. 

 

JD:  What possible difference does that make? 

 

Read the procedures in 3473...