On 1/14/2014 7:23 AM, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
Isn't that basically the problem of the inner traffic sender, not the
problem of the tunnel that is carrying the traffic?
Asking tunnel's to solve the problem of applications with undesirable
behavior seems backwards.
By that argument, apps using TCP shouldn't expect the transport to
control congestion. They ought to control it at the app layer.
Tunneled MPLS, when encapsulated inside UDP, *is* the "application". UDP
expects the app to deal with congestion, so it's entirely reasonable for
UDP to expect the tunneling system to do this.
Joe
Yours,
Joel
On 1/14/14 10:20 AM, Eggert, Lars wrote:
On 2014-1-14, at 15:20, Stewart Bryant <stbryant(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com> wrote:
Yes, the inner (real) transport header is the only meaningful place
to apply congestion avoidance.
But what if the inner traffic isn't congestion controlled?
Lars