Re: [Mpls-interop] Who will be in Geneva?

[Ben Niven-Jenkins <[e-mail]>]

Adrian,

On 27/11/2008 22:27, "Adrian Farrel" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> I ended up with a modest list of MPLS-TP design team folk willing to
> squander their evenings in Geneva working on drafts. Must be that the Swiss
> night life is too exciting!

Or that there is no Q.Whisky in SG15 ;-)

> Lastly, I would like to see if I can understand the issues with the OAM
> techniques proposed. Can we continue to use TTL? Does the idea of using
> nesting for all OAM segments really hold up? Is the OAM cart in danger of
> driving the protection hobbyhorse (pardon my mixed metaphore).

I'm no OAM expert (I leave that to Tom :-) ) but I am yet to be convinced by
nesting all OAM segments for the reason that it sounds complicated and that
means to me that it will be expensive to run and to scale.  It also sounds
like I'd have to have my network constructed in a particular way to be able
to use OAM which means even in the best run network I will at some point not
be able to run OAM when I need it (and the customer is screaming at me)
because the network wasn't constructed correctly (either by design or actual
configuration != design).

Ben

_______________________________________________
Mpls-interop mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls-interop