IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Mpls-interop] MPLS-TP OAM requirements - Lockandnotificationof lock

"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Tue, 05 May 2009 10:05 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
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 D6A823A6DEA for <mpls-interop@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 May 2009 03:05:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.14
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.14 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.458, BAYES_00=-2.599, STOX_REPLY_TYPE=0.001]
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 mtT0-DutHGLp for <mpls-interop@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 May 2009 03:05:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (asmtp2.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.249]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDC873A68EE for <mpls-interop@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 May 2009 03:05:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n45A6ZVR022760; Tue, 5 May 2009 11:06:35 +0100
Received: from your029b8cecfe (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id n45A6VAW022686; Tue, 5 May 2009 11:06:34 +0100
Message-ID: <3EC3B42EADEE4472A1C0DEBFFFC22E27@your029b8cecfe>
From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: "Lam, Hing-Kam (Kam)" <hklam@alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <0BDFFF51DC89434FA33F8B37FCE363D516FDAE56@zcarhxm2.corp.nortel.com> <42D4A33F1EAE420289ED4EFCA24D19BB@your029b8cecfe><49FDE0C4.7060807@alcatel-lucent.com><49FE241F.5080007@chello.nl><077E41CFFD002C4CAB7DFA4386A53264A754E0@DEMUEXC014.nsn-intra.net><49FE98B2.5080801@chello.nl><077E41CFFD002C4CAB7DFA4386A53264A755C1@DEMUEXC014.nsn-intra.net><0BDFFF51DC89434FA33F8B37FCE363D516FDB24D@zcarhxm2.corp.nortel.com> <A37753B7B7A3134F9366EE6B4052F43B02C8D3AA@ILEXC2U03.ndc.lucent.com>
Date: Tue, 05 May 2009 11:01:54 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type="original"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579
Cc: mpls-interop@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Mpls-interop] MPLS-TP OAM requirements - Lockandnotificationof lock
X-BeenThere: mpls-interop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
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: Tue, 05 May 2009 10:05:29 -0000

Am I missing something?
Does notification across layers take place within a node or on the wire?

Thanks,
Adrian

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Lam, Hing-Kam (Kam)" <hklam@alcatel-lucent.com>
To: "Malcolm Betts" <betts01@nortel.com>; "Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod
HaSharon)" <nurit.sprecher@nsn.com>; <hhelvoort@chello.nl>;
<mpls-interop@ietf.org>; "Martin Vigoureux"
<martin.vigoureux@alcatel-lucent.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 6:51 AM
Subject: Re: [Mpls-interop] MPLS-TP OAM requirements - Lockandnotificationof
lock


Dear all,

See inline below. I am addressing the issue of notification across
layers, not addressing notifying the sink (egress) points.

Regards,

Kam

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mpls-interop-bounces@ietf.org
[mailto:mpls-interop-bounces@ietf.org]
> On Behalf Of Malcolm Betts
> Sent: Monday, May 04, 2009 8:42 AM
> To: Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon); hhelvoort@chello.nl;
> mpls-interop@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Mpls-interop] MPLS-TP OAM requirements - Lock
> andnotificationof lock
>
> All,
> I think you are making this far too complicated...  I see no need to
> propagate the locked indication across layers.
>
> [Lam, Hing-Kam (Kam)] The bottom line is to avoid unexpected
> interruption to the client services so that to reduce unnecessary alarm
> being raised from the client layer.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email