Re: [Mpls-interop] MPLS-TP OAM requirements - AIS/LockNotif - Can MIPs send "usolicited" OAM messages ?

Huub van Helvoort <hhelvoort@chello.nl> Mon, 04 May 2009 12:58 UTC

Return-Path: <hhelvoort@chello.nl>
X-Original-To: mpls-interop@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls-interop@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F6493A6EF2 for <mpls-interop@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 May 2009 05:58:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.321
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.321 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.109, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_AT=0.424, HOST_EQ_AT=0.745]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sZy4T2xB37Jg for <mpls-interop@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 May 2009 05:58:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from viefep13-int.chello.at (viefep13-int.chello.at [62.179.121.33]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3261D3A6BB7 for <mpls-interop@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 May 2009 05:58:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from edge04.upc.biz ([192.168.13.239]) by viefep13-int.chello.at (InterMail vM.7.09.01.00 201-2219-108-20080618) with ESMTP id <20090504130013.VTAI25679.viefep13-int.chello.at@edge04.upc.biz>; Mon, 4 May 2009 15:00:13 +0200
Received: from McAsterix.local ([24.132.228.153]) by edge04.upc.biz with edge id nR0B1b00m3KDBhC04R0CUi; Mon, 04 May 2009 15:00:13 +0200
X-SourceIP: 24.132.228.153
Message-ID: <49FEE6DA.3040009@chello.nl>
Date: Mon, 04 May 2009 15:00:10 +0200
From: Huub van Helvoort <hhelvoort@chello.nl>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Macintosh/20090302)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Martin Vigoureux <martin.vigoureux@alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <49FDE174.7000904@alcatel-lucent.com> <49FE253E.5060803@chello.nl> <49FEB841.2010808@alcatel-lucent.com>
In-Reply-To: <49FEB841.2010808@alcatel-lucent.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: mpls-interop@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Mpls-interop] MPLS-TP OAM requirements - AIS/LockNotif - Can MIPs send "usolicited" OAM messages ?
X-BeenThere: mpls-interop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: hhelvoort@chello.nl
List-Id: IETF MPLS Interoperability Design Team <mpls-interop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls-interop>, <mailto:mpls-interop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mpls-interop>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls-interop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-interop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls-interop>, <mailto:mpls-interop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 May 2009 12:58:58 -0000

Hi Martin,

You responded:

> please see in-line.

me too [hvh]

> Huub van Helvoort a écrit :
>> Bonsoir Martin,
>>
>> You wrote:
>>
>>> as part of the discussion on AIS/Lock Notification,
>>> the server layer MEPs, detecting a fault/lock condition, should
>>> inform (the MEPs of) the client layers relying on that
>>> server layer and which are affected by the condition.
>>>
>>> However as I understand it is not the MEP (sMEP) of the
>>> server layer that sends a notification to the client layers
>>> MEPs (cMEP) but the MIP (cMIP) of the client layer which
>>> is hosted on the same node than the MEP (sMEP).
>>> See the figure below (where the double dashed line is
>>> an LSP, and the ~ line represents an LSP nested in the
>>> other LSP.
>>>
>>> +------+      +------+      +------+      +------+
>>> |      |------|      |------| cMIP |~~~~~~| cMEP |
>>> |      |      |      |      |  ^   |      |      |
>>> |      |      |      |      |  |   |      |      |
>>> |      |      |      |      |  |   |      |      |
>>> |      |======|      |======| sMEP |      |      |
>>> +------+      +------+      +------+      +------+
>>
>> I modified the figure to align with what you wrote.
> 
> [mvx] thx. In fact the double dashed line was already there
>       but with quite some spacing between the top and bottom.

[hvh] OK, tI had the impression that the upper line indicated
the client path/trail, and the lower the server path/trail

>>> Therefore can MIPs send OAM messages without having priorly received one
>>> or did I miss something?
>>
>> No, a MIP can only respond to messages it receives from a MEP
>> that has the same MEG level, i.e. exists in the same path.
>>
>> In your figure the cMIP ignores messages sent by sMEP.
> 
> but then, how does a Lock condition of the lower LSP
> is notified to cMEP?

This is a consequent action performed in the normal
adaptation function between server and client layer.

Best reagrds, Huub.

-- 
================================================================
                   http://www.van-helvoort.eu/
================================================================
Always remember that you are unique...just like everyone else...