Hi Erminio:
<snipped>
Several service providers regarded this draft as not meeting their
transport networks' needs.
E> This is a true statement: the solution in this draft is useless for many
MPLS- TP deployments.
The two statements do not necessarily follow.
What we established during discussions at the SG15 plenary in February was that
the issue some service providers had was that the IETF BFD solution exceeded
their requirements in that there was additional functionality they did not see
a need for, and that they considered any additional functionality parasitic.
However this is a consequence of adapting an existing technology to a new
application. I do not see any way around that. And the entire joint project was
based on the premise of engineering re-use not greenfield design. That is what
it said on the tin up front, and IMO why when the IETF started down this path
packet transport transitioned from being a minority sport to mainstream, so it
is a bit late to cry foul....
My 2 cents
Dave
----Messaggio originale----
Da: RCosta(_at_)ptinovacao(_dot_)pt
Data: 5-lug-2011 0.02
A: "ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org"<ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>,
"IETF-Announce"<ietf-announce(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Cc: "mpls(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org"<mpls(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Ogg: Re: [mpls] Last Call: <draft-ietf-mpls-tp-cc-cv-rdi-05.txt>
(Proactive Connectivity Verification, Continuity Check and Remote
Defect
indication for MPLS Transport Profile) to Proposed Standard
IMHO and for the record:
ITU-T comments regarding this draft haven't been discussed with ITU-T
but
were simply ignored. No LS describing these comments' resolution was sent.
Several service providers regarded this draft as not meeting their
transport
networks' needs.
[The v03 draft was published in Feb and went to WG LC.
The v04 draft addressing WG LC comments was published on the 28th June
(same
date as the proto write-up).
When was the WG LC launched, to verify LC comments resolution?]
Regards,
Rui
-----Original Message-----
From: mpls-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
[mailto:mpls-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of
The
IESG
Sent: quinta-feira, 30 de Junho de 2011 14:47
To: IETF-Announce
Cc: mpls(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: [mpls] Last Call: <draft-ietf-mpls-tp-cc-cv-rdi-05.txt>
(Proactive
Connectivity Verification, Continuity Check and Remote Defect indication for
MPLS Transport Profile) to Proposed Standard
The IESG has received a request from the Multiprotocol Label Switching
WG
(mpls) to consider the following document:
- 'Proactive Connectivity Verification, Continuity Check and Remote
Defect indication for MPLS Transport Profile'
<draft-ietf-mpls-tp-cc-cv-rdi-05.txt> as a Proposed Standard
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org mailing lists by 2011-07-14. Exceptionally, comments
may
be sent to iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org instead. In either case, please retain the
beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
Abstract
Continuity Check, Proactive Connectivity Verification and Remote
Defect Indication functionalities are required for MPLS-TP OAM.
Continuity Check monitors the integrity of the continuity of the
label switched path for any loss of continuity defect. Connectivity
verification monitors the integrity of the routing of the label
switched path between sink and source for any connectivity issues.
Remote defect indication enables an End Point to report, to its
associated End Point, a fault or defect condition that it detects on
a pseudo wire, label switched path or Section.
This document specifies methods for proactive continuity check,
continuity verification, and remote defect indication for MPLS-TP
label switched paths, pseudo wires and Sections using Bidirectional
Forwarding Detection.
The file can be obtained via
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-tp-cc-cv-rdi/
IESG discussion can be tracked via
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-tp-cc-cv-rdi/
No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf