[c-nsp] Seamless MPLS interacting with flat LDP domains

[Mark Tinka]

On 30/Apr/19 17:27, Robert Raszuk wrote:

>
>
> Now some vendors heavily invested in their hardware to do MPLS
> switching and naturally they will protect their investments. Business
> reasons not technology. In fact some gave up on deep IPv6 header
> support as they believed that all they need is N x 20 bit juggling.
> But this is not about religion to move back to pure IP transport. It
> is about making the network summarization work again - without need
> for more hacks and layers - which this "seamless mpls" is a pure 999,9
> example of  :)

I'm all for simplifying network operation down to the absolute
necessity. If my code shipped with one line - "ip on" - and everything
worked, I'd pay handsomely and move on. But alas.

I was excited about SR as I'm sure we all were - finally, a chance to
get rid of all this overhead. But alas.

If a vendor comes to me with a real example of how to go from MPLS to
plain IP and retain all existing capability with little to no extra
spend, I'd dump MPLS in a heartbeat. But alas.

To be fair, I don't expect vendors to come and tout the end of MPLS...
oh wait, they did, in Paris in 2013 - MPLS/SDN/NFV/IPv6 Congress - it's
2019 now; alas. However, I expect network operators to share common
protein, as MPLS is not necessarily more costly to maintain given it's
baked into all the hardware as standard nowadays, i.e., no real
competitive advantage against the rest of the market by keeping quiet.
Also, you can't completely hide the sound of a chopper landing on the
Reserve Bank lawn...

Mark.