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

Re: [RRG] Map-encap space for "server" vs. "client" end-users?




On Mar 4, 2008, at 8:24 PM, Brian Dickson wrote:

William Herrin wrote:
On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 7:08 PM, Brian Dickson <briand@ca.afilias.info> wrote:

It's the other way around that matters - your packets being tunneled,
 means you don't get to see things like:
 - ICMP unreachables concerning the outer header destination
 - ICMP MTU exceeded concerning the outer header
 - ICMP TTL exceeded concerning the outer header


Brian,

How is this handled in today's MPLS networks? It seems like they
should have essentially the same problem: the packet faults at a node
which doesn't know how to interpret the contents of a packet with the
given label.

MPLS is, generally, a strictly internal mechansim. While there may be inter-provider MPLS, I'm not aware
of any significant deployments.


There are, however, people offering MPLS Tag translation to connect enterprise networks together.

Regards
Marshall

Which means, any problem can be identified as being entirely one ISP's problem.

Plus, there are knobs on MPLS configurations, that allow you to "expose" the hops, by decrementing IP TTL as it goes.

It gives a limited ability to traceroute, at least, when that is enabled.

(My experience was that customers are perturbed when the network shows one "hop" from LA to Frankfurt. :-))

Brian

--
to unsubscribe send a message to rrg-request@psg.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg


--
to unsubscribe send a message to rrg-request@psg.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg