Hi Adrian,
Sorry for the mistake, I have resend the mail to IETF.
As for your comments about specific requirements, IMHO, I think most of the
requirements in the document are actually a little bit generic.And requirement
21 of RFC 5654 is so generic as well. The proposed requirement is specifying
what that requirement means in the context of OAM.
Another comments is about the Diagnostic Tests which include loopback and
estimation of bandwidth. From a carrier's viewpoint, I think loopback and Route
Tracing belonging to the same tpye of function, Bandwidth Measurement and
Packet loss Measurement belonging to the same tpye of function. So I propose to
make loopback as a individual requirement just as Route Tracing.
Best regards
Ruiquan Jing
China Telecom
-----Original Message-----
From: Adrian Farrel [mailto:Adrian(_dot_)Farrel(_at_)huawei(_dot_)com]
Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2009 11:28 PM
To: ruiquan(_dot_)jing(_at_)ties(_dot_)itu(_dot_)int
Cc: iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-requirements
(RequirementsforOAMin MPLS Transport Networks) to Proposed Standard
By the way, was there an exceptional circumstance driving you to send direct to
the IESG rather than to the IETF list?
Thanks,
Adrian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Adrian Farrel" <Adrian(_dot_)Farrel(_at_)huawei(_dot_)com>
To: <ruiquan(_dot_)jing(_at_)ties(_dot_)itu(_dot_)int>;
<iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 11:49 PM
Subject: Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-requirements
(RequirementsforOAMin MPLS Transport Networks) to Proposed Standard
Hi Jing,
As a carrier, we think it is very important to operate MPLS-TP OAM
with a behavior that is consistent with transport network operations.
So we propose the following requirement to be added to MPLS-TP OAM
requirements draft:
"
It MUST be possible to operate the MPLS-TP OAM protocols, which
satisfy functional requirements that are common to general transport
layer network (i.e., independent of technology), in a way that is
similar to the way equivalent mechanisms are operated in other
transport layer technologies (e.g., SONET/SDH, OTN and Ethernet).
"
I want to make sure that your opinion is heard.
To do this, we must convert this text into something more concrete
that it is possible to implement.
The problem is that what you have written is very widely scoped and
would require an implementer to go and find out (from somewhere) what
the actual requirements are. We need specific and tightly scoped
requirements. That means that you need to document the individual
"functional requirements that are common to general transport layer
networks" and the mode of operation that would be "similar to the []
equivalent mechanisms [] in other transport layer technologies."
It is simply not enough to say "I want the OAM to be sort of like
something else." While I can sympathise with your desire, I could not
produce a product that was certain to meet your requirements.
So, I suggest that what you need to do is list specific requirements
for functions or operational behavior that you believe are not already
covered by this document. I know that the authors were trying to make
the MPLS-TP OAM "similar" to both general packet networks and general
transport networks - but they tried to do this by listing the detailed
requirements one by one.
Thanks,
Adrian
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf