--- 1/draft-ietf-mpls-mldp-in-band-signaling-04.txt 2011-12-01 19:13:45.478754416 +0100 +++ 2/draft-ietf-mpls-mldp-in-band-signaling-05.txt 2011-12-01 19:13:45.502754921 +0100 @@ -1,23 +1,23 @@ Network Working Group IJ. Wijnands, Ed. Internet-Draft T. Eckert Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems, Inc. -Expires: November 19, 2011 N. Leymann +Expires: June 3, 2012 N. Leymann Deutsche Telekom M. Napierala AT&T Labs - May 18, 2011 + December 1, 2011 Multipoint LDP in-band signaling for Point-to-Multipoint and Multipoint- to-Multipoint Label Switched Paths - draft-ietf-mpls-mldp-in-band-signaling-04 + draft-ietf-mpls-mldp-in-band-signaling-05 Abstract Consider an IP multicast tree, constructed by Protocol Independent Multicast (PIM), needs to pass through an MPLS domain in which Multipoint LDP (mLDP) Point-to-Multipoint and/or Multipoint-to- Multipoint Labels Switched Paths (LSPs) can be created. The part of the IP multicast tree that traverses the MPLS domain can be instantiated as a multipoint LSP. When a PIM Join message is received at the border of the MPLS domain, information from that @@ -35,21 +35,21 @@ Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." - This Internet-Draft will expire on November 19, 2011. + This Internet-Draft will expire on June 3, 2012. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect @@ -264,24 +264,24 @@ is typically created due to receiving a PIM join and has a subnet mask of 32 for IPv4 and 128 for IPv6. The latter is typically created via the static RP mapping and has a variable subnet mask. The RP state is used to build a tree to the RP and used for sender only branches. Each state (group specific and RP state) will result in a separate MP2MP LSP. The merging of the two MP2MP LSPs will be done by PIM on the root LSR. No speccial procedures are nessesary for PIM to merge the two LSPs, each LSP is effectively treated as a PIM enabled interface. Please see [RFC5015] for more details. - In order transport the packets of sender only branch to the root of - the LSP a MP2MP is created. This will cause the sender only branches - to receive each others packets. These packets will be dropped and - not forwarded, if that affect is undesireable some other means of + For transporting the packets of a sender only branch we create a + MP2MP LSP. Other sender only branches will receive these packets and + will not forward them because there are no receivers. These packets + will be dropped. If that affect is undesireable some other means of transport has to be established to forward packets to the root of the tree, like a Multi-Point to Point LSP for example. A technique to unicast packets to the root of a P2MP or MP2MP LSP is documented in [I-D.rosen-l3vpn-mvpn-mspmsi] section 3.2.2.1 and [I-D.ietf-mpls-ldp-p2mp] section 3. 3. LSP opaque encodings This section documents the different transit opaque encodings. @@ -500,18 +500,18 @@ USA Email: eckert@cisco.com Nicolai Leymann Deutsche Telekom Winterfeldtstrasse 21 Berlin 10781 Germany - Email: nicolai.leymann@t-systems.com + Email: n.leymann@telekom.de Maria Napierala AT&T Labs 200 Laurel Avenue Middletown NJ 07748 USA Email: mnapierala@att.com