RE: Layer 2 Switching Caps LSPs

["David Allan" <dallan@nortelnetworks.com>]

Hi Adrian:

Your suggestion is in a way reasonable but with the caveat that in IEEE
terms, a bridging topology is currently all VLANs (802.1Q single spanning
tree) or partitioned into specific ranges (I believe 64 in 802.1s although I
do not claim to be an expert). 

If the PEs were to implement a bridge function and we were using GMPLS to
interconnect them, then the control plane should be identifying either all
VLANs (single spanning tree, which I beleive the draft covers by referring
simply to Ethernet port) or a VLAN range to be associated with the LSP
consistent with 802.1s if it is to operate to interconnect bridges defined
by the IEEE...

I suspect assuming any other behavior (e.g. LSP for single VLAN tag) would
go outside the boundary of what is currently defined...so alignment with
802.1s IMO would be a minimum requirement if we are to consider carrying
VLAN information in GMPLS signalling....

cheers
Dave

You wrote....
> Hi,
> 
> The authors of the draft might like to clarify for the list 
> exactly what data plane operations they are suggesting. To me 
> it seems possible that the draft is proposing VLAN ID 
> *swapping*. But an alternative is that the VLAN ID is used as 
> a label, but that the same label is used for the full length 
> of the LSP.
> 
> Adrian