[rbridge] Questions - VLANs & MPLS
trill at punk.co.nz
Sun Sep 28 01:53:52 PDT 2008
Donald Eastlake wrote:
> I would suggest that you look at the IETF Proceedings and the TRILL WG
> presentations and minutes therein as well as reading the change history
> in the base protocol document.
Will check these out, thanks.
> Also, I was curious why MPLS wasn't used as the forwarding method..?
> Why should it have? The starting point for TRILL/RBridges was always to
> do Layer 2 forwarding based on link state routing as proposed in Radia's
> original Infocom paper:
> Nowhere in your message do you state any reason why MPLS would be a
> better idea.
Sorry my original phrasing may have suggested I thought it should.
I don't necessarily think it should've been used, but it seems it could
feasibly be used to achieve a similar outcome. I realise this is
simplifying a lot of whats involved though, and I should maybe think it
So I was curious if it had been considered and rejected and why. Maybe
its something thats been given thought previously in another WG.
I figured the benefits were:
* Use of an existing forwarding method
* Existing hardware support - this is an assumption. It may not be so
simple and may require just as much work as is needed to implement RBridges.
More information about the rbridge