Hi,
One question about the difference of the encapsulation modes between CV and
Route Tracing.
In Section 3, there are three encapsulation modes for on-demand CV: "LSP-Ping
with IP encapsulation", "On-demand CV with IP encapsulation, over ACH" and
"Non-IP based On-demand CV, using ACH", but for On-demand Route Tracing (in
section 4), there are only two modes: "On-demand LSP Route Tracing with IP
encapsulation" and "Non-IP based On-demand LSP Route Tracing, using ACH". Seems
that there should be "On-demand LSP Route Tracing with IP encapsulation, over
ACH" accordingly. What's reason behind this? Or maybe I missed something.
Best regards,
Mach
-----Original Message-----
From: mpls-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
[mailto:mpls-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of The
IESG
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2011 9:46 PM
To: IETF-Announce
Cc: mpls(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: [mpls] Last Call: <draft-ietf-mpls-tp-on-demand-cv-06.txt> (MPLS
On-demand Connectivity Verification and Route Tracing) to Proposed Standard
The IESG has received a request from the Multiprotocol Label Switching WG
(mpls) to consider the following document:
- 'MPLS On-demand Connectivity Verification and Route Tracing'
<draft-ietf-mpls-tp-on-demand-cv-06.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 2011-08-25. 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
Label Switched Path Ping (LSP-Ping) is an existing and widely
deployed Operations, Administration and Maintenance (OAM) mechanism
for Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths
(LSPs). This document describes extensions to LSP-Ping so that LSP-
Ping can be used for On-demand Connectivity Verification of MPLS
Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) LSPs and Pseudowires. This document also
clarifies procedures to be used for processing the related OAM
packets. Further, it describes procedures for using LSP-Ping to
perform Connectivity Verification and Route Tracing functions in
MPLS-TP networks. Finally this document updates RFC 4379 by adding a
new address type and requesting an IANA registry.
The file can be obtained via
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-tp-on-demand-cv/
IESG discussion can be tracked via
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-tp-on-demand-cv/
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
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf