> What I'm getting at is that IP allows re-write sharing in that what needs to > change on two IP frames taking the same paths but ultimately reaching > different destinations are re-written (e.g. DMAC, egress-port) identically. > And, at least with IPIP, you are able to look at the inner-frame for ECMP > calculations. Depending on your MPLS design, that may not be the case. If you > have too deep of a label stack (3-5 depending on ASIC), you can't look at the > payload and you end up with polarization. > > Not really as you are still forced to rewrite on imposition for the simplest > form of tunneling, and for TE as often as you need to go against your SPT as > well, it‘s just happening on IP (and IP rewrites are more expensive than MPLS > rewrites / forwarding operations).
Sure, but not following SPT in IP isn't rocket science. You can do it using traditional protocols if you really want to, or you can write a controller to do it for you. And it doesn't take 100's of people to do so. It doesn't even take 10. So, yes, you need to justify the funding of those people, so milage will vary based on size and scope of your network. David _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
