IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mpls-tp] Alarm Reporting (aka AIS)

Huub van Helvoort <huubatwork@gmail.com> Wed, 08 December 2010 21:49 UTC

Return-Path: <huubatwork@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: mpls-tp@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls-tp@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F1FB3A689F for <mpls-tp@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Dec 2010 13:49:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.799
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.799 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.200, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_15=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 C5PVWi9tOSII for <mpls-tp@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Dec 2010 13:49:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ey0-f171.google.com (mail-ey0-f171.google.com [209.85.215.171]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF0A33A687D for <mpls-tp@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Dec 2010 13:49:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: by eyg5 with SMTP id 5so1424918eyg.16 for <mpls-tp@ietf.org>; Wed, 08 Dec 2010 13:50:36 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id :disposition-notification-to:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=WkkdNDv59buCT3CZenPk5Hj/bcarqqYuxjojnz0PKok=; b=IKzEfqW5xmuknT2lLSSzCOJaXEsyGS432IQFE0O04y0PDIH7OX2SD1y3Q1ifLC7Zfq E7DkeeW2UX1JKFkXh5wjPZAar+FMdMJsyD1ehJab7/p11EFD/tPx3aeadaowvBMTx32H aqaKd40Wa2x2rp2sqt85prtzoYluGh2qJGmb4=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:disposition-notification-to:date:from:user-agent :mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=ukwPyBfK8ZvofUMZANvhhyELs4FrOg3Sp2r+HDF3IRLLDYkuk3WVn/Tiitfra7zZOk o+DThqhowuussPqrpmlLZoqwBUEqw8koz3auSXsJhHQ9pAYDwgLRsZ1S+Wt0nZfEIXT1 BFh8dMiRjQrvsUcny2D4cxHUD72sk526xy8gU=
Received: by 10.213.15.144 with SMTP id k16mr2946264eba.77.1291845035965; Wed, 08 Dec 2010 13:50:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from McAsterix.local (dhcp-077-250-051-060.chello.nl [77.250.51.60]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id w20sm768862eeh.0.2010.12.08.13.50.34 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 08 Dec 2010 13:50:35 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4CFFFDA8.6070207@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2010 22:50:32 +0100
From: Huub van Helvoort <huubatwork@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "mpls-tp@ietf.org" <mpls-tp@ietf.org>
References: <077E41CFFD002C4CAB7DFA4386A532640308F66E@DEMUEXC014.nsn-intra.net> <6D3D47CB84BDE349BC23BF1C94E316E44003B2D47B@EMV62-UKRD.domain1.systemhost.net> <006201cb96f9$c440df40$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <A3C5DF08D38B6049839A6F553B331C76D6B78ED55A@ILPTMAIL02.ecitele.com> <AANLkTintTb9AKp48q28t+-_S3Zo4q1t_qZMm=vz7B6n5@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTintTb9AKp48q28t+-_S3Zo4q1t_qZMm=vz7B6n5@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [mpls-tp] Alarm Reporting (aka AIS)
X-BeenThere: mpls-tp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: MPLS-TP Mailing list <mpls-tp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls-tp>, <mailto:mpls-tp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mpls-tp>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls-tp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-tp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls-tp>, <mailto:mpls-tp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2010 21:49:11 -0000

Hi,

In the Stockholm meeting I proposed to change "Signal"
into "Service" and use the same acronyms, but the response
was that delivering packets is not a service.

So how about TL (total loss) and PL (partial loss).

Just my 2 euroc.

Regards, Huub.

==============

> And if there's no signal, then, as I think of it, there's no SD in
> packet layer network.
>
> Regards,
> Greg
>
> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Alexander Vainshtein
> <Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com
> <mailto:Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com>> wrote:
>
>     Tom,
>     ... snipping to the key statement in your email...
>     ==============================
>          Perhaps we should note that in a packet layer network, there is
>     no signal and so
>          signal fail can never be asserted so AIS is a null condition.
>          In which case, G.tpoam is spot on.
>     ==============================
>     ... snipped to the end ...
>
>     Support!!!
>
>     My 2c,



-- 
*****************************************************************
                          我爱外点一七三一

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email