Subject: RE: response to ITU-T SG13

From: "David Allan"<[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 09:40:19 -0400

Giles:

A clarification...

> which means that intermediate LSRs that use a hash to load 
> balance MPLS
> traffic over equal cost links/paths have to be careful to 
> exclude the S
> bit from any hash.

If I am inverse muxing an LSP at an intermadiate LSR, is this not on the
basis of some hashing on the payload for the current label, which could be
more labels...I'm not quite getting your example.

Dave

---

From: Giles Heron <[email-masked]>
Date: 15 Apr 2002 15:07:27 +0000

> more labels...I'm not quite getting your example.

effectively yes, you are hashing on the payload for the current label -
given that it includes more labels.  So, for example, an LSR switching
based on an LDP-assigned label might have a set of equal cost next hops
in its IGP - across which it could load balance traffic based on a hash
which includes the draft-martini label inside that LDP assigned label
(though of course it wouldn't know whether the inner label was being
used for draft-martini, for MPLS VPN, or for something else...)

Giles

-- 
=================================================================
Giles Heron    Principal Network Architect    PacketExchange Ltd.
ph: +44 7880 506185              "if you build it they will yawn"
=================================================================