Subject: RE: MPLS PID

From: Shahram Davari <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 08:07:40 -0800

Lloyd,

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Lloyd Wood [mailto:[email-masked]]
>Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2003 11:03 AM
>To: Shahram Davari
>Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
>Subject: RE: [PWE3] MPLS PID 
>
>
>On Mon, 31 Mar 2003, Shahram Davari wrote:
>
>> for all ECMP
>> implementations such as the one that I described
>> in earlier emails in which both the first nibble
>> and the CRC are used to detect IP.
>
>IPv6 doesn't _have_ a header checksum.

Yes. The method I said only works for IPV4.

>IPv4's header checksum is a pain to work with.

!!!!

>
>Are you describing an existing implementation? It sounds broken.

Why is it broken? It works much better than using the first nibble to detect IP.

>
>If you know from context you're carrying IP, then the intended
>identification in the first nibble is enough to identify 4 or 6 or
>something else, and you don't need to sniff the packet contents.

Sure. But the question was how can you detect that the payload is IP.

-Shahram

>
>L.
>
><http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/L.Wood/><[email-masked]>
>