Hi,
I know this is a late comment, but feel free to view it as an early
IETF LC comment if you wish:-)
Section 5 seems to catalogue a fair number of options and allows for
incompatible implementations:
These differences in the behavior of different implementations may
result in unexpected behavior or lack of interoperability. In some
cases, it may be difficult or impossible to achieve the desired
policies with certain implementations or combinations of
implementations.
It would be really nice to have something (or some combination) at least
recommended to be implemented to ensure interoperability. Do you think
it's possible to define such a recommendation, or do we just punt?
(Surely there is a defacto default/minimal mode already in the market!)
Thanks,
Lou
On 5/11/2017 12:45 PM, Eric C Rosen wrote:
> I have now posted draft-ietf-mpls-rfc3107bis-02.txt, which I believe
> addresses the LC comments.
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> m...@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>
_______________________________________________
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
