Subject: Last Call: 'Virtual Private LAN Service' to Proposed Standard

From: The IESG <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2005 11:17:56 -0400

The IESG has received a request from the Layer 2 Virtual Private Networks WG 
to consider the following document:

- 'Virtual Private LAN Service '
   <draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-bgp-05.txt> as a Proposed Standard

The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action.  Please send any comments to the
[email-masked] or [email-masked] mailing lists by 2005-07-27.

The file can be obtained via
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-bgp-05.txt

---

From: Per Ole Klemetsrud <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2005 17:57:10 +0200 (CEST)

I'm a bit unclear about Section 4.1, Encapsulation.  It references
"Setup and Maintenance using LDP" - which doesn't really contain much info 
about encapsulation.  Should it instead be "Encapsulation Methods for 
Transport of Ethernet Over MPLS Networks"?

Also 4.1 references the P bit in the Control Flag, but this bit is not 
defined in Figure 4.

Do we need the P bit at all, or should this be left to the operator to 
configure NSP functions?  One scenario where manual configuration would be 
beneficial is when mixing tagged, untagged and dual-tagged PE interfaces 
in the same VPLS.

Regards
Per Ole Klemetsrud

---

From: Kireeti Kompella <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2005 14:36:00 -0700 (PDT)

> Transport of Ethernet Over MPLS Networks"?

Thanks for your careful reading!  You found two bugs -- one: the
reference should be draft-ietf-pwe3-ethernet-encap-10.txt.

> Also 4.1 references the P bit in the Control Flag, but this bit is not

Two: the P bit was nuked after comments I received, but I forgot to
remove it in this section.

> beneficial is when mixing tagged, untagged and dual-tagged PE interfaces

You're right that this functionality is needed; however, the current
thinking (in line with your own thoughts) is that this is a local
decision.  For example, at PE1, the packets entering a given VPLS are
dual-tagged, but at PE2, they are single-tagged.  So, it doesn't make
sense to signal this.

Thanks again!
Kireeti.
-------