Subject: (ION) InARP Over Unidirectional VCs

From: Juha Heinanen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 09:05:19 +0200 (EET)

i just submitted the following internet draft:

            Inverse ARP over Unidirectional Virtual Circuits
      ftp://lohi.eng.telia.fi/tmp/draft-heinanen-inarp-uni-00.txt

Abstract

   This memo describes operation of an Inverse Address Resolution
   Protocol (InARP) over unidirectional virtual circuits such as MPLS
   LSPs.

looks like the ion wg (on the cc line) doesn't exist anymore.  if so,
may be the bmvpn wg could consider adopting this i-d?

we need an inarp for mpls in order to autoconfigure the cpes in mpls
based network provisioned l2 vpns. in addition, we need an mpls version
of lmi.

-- juha
X-Info: To unsubscribe, email [email-masked]' with
X-Info: 'unsubscribe ion' in the body of the message.

---

From: "Andrew G. Malis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 12:56:00 -0500

Juha,

You seem to be presupposing an MPLS interface to a box that is 
participating in MPLS signaling (in order to set up LSPs), but not 
participating in network-provided IP routing (else, there would not be a 
need for InARP).  Are you setting up point-to-point LSPs between the CE 
routers in the VPN, using MPLS as your L2?  And are you using LDP as your 
LSP setup protocol between the CE and PE routers?

Right now, when people are talking about MPLS-based L2 VPNs, they are 
mostly discussing emulated FR or ATM connections as in the Martini or 
Kompella drafts.

Cheers,
Andy

--------

---

From: Juha Heinanen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 20:10:19 +0200 (EET)

Andrew G. Malis writes:

 > need for InARP).  

no, i assume the same thing as with current network provided frame relay
or atm vpns, where the network provides a set of lsps that terminate at
the interface towards the cpe.

 > Are you setting up point-to-point LSPs between the CE 

in order to fully automate things, the network edge router needs to
somehow tell the cpe router about the lsps that are configured at the
network edge-cpe interface.  if may be possible that the network edge
can push the lsps using ldp (i haven't looked at that yet) or then an
mpls version of lmi would need to be invented.

 > mostly discussing emulated FR or ATM connections as in the Martini or 

yes, but i would like to use mpls lsps all the way to the cpe in order
to make things simpler and to preserve the same qos properties on both
sides of the provider edge-cpe interface.  in addition, mpls label
stacking brings other benefits that are not available in fr and atm
case.

-- juha

---

From: "Andrew G. Malis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 13:44:49 -0500

Juha,

Given what you said below, your InARP draft should work, but you can't stop 
there - as you noted, you need to automate things either by using LDP to 
push the labels, or an MPLS LMI.  Otherwise, the CE can't know when to send 
the InARP requests.

Cheers,
Andy

-------

---

From: Juha Heinanen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 22:06:29 +0200 (EET)

> push the labels, or an MPLS LMI.  Otherwise, the CE can't know when to send 

it seems that downstream unsolicited label mapping and label withdraw
messages could be used for this purpose.  if the necessary subset of ldp
is not considered an overkill, an i-d would need to written to describe
the details of this ldp application.

-- juha