[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <F6885DC5CBE92C4BB4D654841E63A30FD7DD5F03@ENFIRHMBX1.datcon.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 09:53:40 +0000
From: Neil Jerram <Neil.Jerram@...aswitch.com>
To: 'Simon Wunderlich' <sw@...onwunderlich.de>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [net-next v3 2/3] UAPI: add MPLS label stack definition
> Subject: [net-next v3 2/3] UAPI: add MPLS label stack definition
[...]
> +/* Reference: RFC 5462, RFC 3032
> + *
> + * 0 1 2 3
> + * 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
> + * +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> + * | Label | TC |S| TTL |
> + * +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> + *
> + * Label: Label Value, 20 bits
> + * TC: Traffic Class field, 3 bits
> + * S: Bottom of Stack, 1 bit
> + * TTL: Time to Live, 8 bits
> + */
> +
> +struct mpls_label_stack {
> + __be32 entry;
> +};
The "label stack" name isn't quite right as this struct describes just one entry in an MPLS label stack. Perhaps one of the following instead?
- mpls_label
- mpls_label_entry
- mpls_label_stack_entry
- mpls_lse.
I suppose mpls_label_stack_entry is the most pedantically correct (and is what RFC 3032 says); but for conciseness and general readability I favour mpls_label.
Regards,
Neil
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists