[c-nsp] Rant: ASR1000 MPLS (not) load-balancing

[Robert Raszuk]

> Hence I'd always prefer transit nodes to use solely the MPLS stack for any
> clues on how to load-share.


That may not be a good idea.

Think about SR-MPLS and global labels with say 5 TE segment nodes (hops).
As MPLS header would be identical all flows travelling via such TE path
would get zero load balancing across ECMP paths even parallel L3 links.

Even if you get fancy and stick there EL as described
in draft-ietf-mpls-spring-entropy-label-12 the limited ERLD in most
platforms will not even reach it in the middle of the network.

Not to mention that P routes may be receiving both IP and MPLS traffic. But
I guess your point was that ".. if packets is mpls packet".

Thx,
R.