On 1/17/22 09:57, Brandon Butterworth wrote:
Isn't the argument here that if it's in most chip sets already it might reasonably be expected to be a standard low end feature by now, along with IPv6?
That it isn't may be why people are open to SRv6 (I'm assuming some are based on this discussion) - if they have to pay extra they only want to do so where they are generating revenue from it, the end points.
Complexity and architectural cleanliness are not a consideration, if a vendor makes a box that does the job at the right price there is a high risk people will buy it.
There are other things that are required to support MPLS services than just chip and software capability. Control plane, buffer memory, queue depth, e.t.c. That is why you would not find a lack of MPLS support in Ethernet switches... you would find "broken" support, because the rest of the hardware is not designed to deliver the same level of MPLS service scale that a high-end router would; and the vendors make that very clear. An Ethernet switch running MPLS can probably be an excellent P router, but won't be an awesome PE router. There are still some IP routing features we consider "basic" in bigger routers that attract extra costs in Ethernet switches. Never mind MPLS. Let's not confuse "MPLS no longer being expensive" with "MPLS being a low-end feature". I find it hard to believe that SRv6 support will be enabled on low-end devices like Ethernet switches by the traditional vendors. But hey, I have been wrong before. Mark.