2 Dec
2016
2 Dec
'16
4:16 p.m.
Job Snijders wrote:
I consider this a cascading failure. Clearly IEEE's change had a ripple effect, and suprised a number of implementers, and ended up hurting us.
this would be credible if this were a previously unknown problem, but it isn't. It's been known for years that you need to be careful when handling mpls encapsulated packets which encapsulate L2 frames and where the source mac address starts with 4 or 6. This is not a new problem and because it's not new, there is no good reason for vendors to make the same mistakes again and again. TBH, it beggars belief that new L2 hardware is being thrown out the door which is unable to forward frames of this form due to hardware limitations, and that it's apparently unfixable. Nick