Re: [mpls-tp] [PWE3] [AHMPLS-TP] Re: poll ondraft-he-mpls-tp-csf-03.txt

[<[e-mail]>]

As a general observation, it is  not sensible to try and operate an efficient cl-ps mode network at scale without a distributed directed routing function...so practically the point below is specious.

In principle however, there is no reason why adjacent IP nodes (in their layer network topology) could not have DP OAM hellos operating that are not associated with any specific CP/MP function/protocol.

However, all this is missing the key point...and that is we should not have functional coupling between different layer networks (in any DP/CP/MP component sense) as each layer must look after itself.  If it can't then either (i) fix the deficient layer network technology or (ii) live with it....what we should not be doing is screwing-up some other layer network.

regards, Neil

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail] 
> [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of LEVRAU, LIEVEN (LIEVEN)
> Sent: 02 December 2010 06:49
> To: Yuanlong Jiang; John E Drake; Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - 
> IL/Hod HaSharon); Loa Andersson; [e-mail]; 
> [e-mail]; [e-mail]; MPLS-TP ad hoc team
> Subject: Re: [mpls-tp] [PWE3] [AHMPLS-TP] Re: poll 
> ondraft-he-mpls-tp-csf-03.txt
> 
> Nope - ip can detect it via BFD on scale way below minutes.
> What you are refereeing to is the IGP control plane time out.
> The issue is to detect failures accurately and fast in the 
> data plane when there is no control plane.
> ./
> Lieven
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On 
> Behalf Of Yuanlong Jiang
> Sent: 02 December 2010 02:19
> To: John E Drake; Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon); 
> Loa Andersson; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; 
> [e-mail]; MPLS-TP ad hoc team
> Subject: Re: [PWE3] [AHMPLS-TP] Re: [mpls-tp] poll 
> ondraft-he-mpls-tp-csf-03.txt
> 
> John,
> 
> Typically, IP will only detect a failure in a time scale of minutes.
> That is one reason why MPLS-TP OAM and Protection & Switching 
> is needed.
> I am not sure which mechanism in MPLS provides the CSF-like 
> capability, could you give more hints?
> 
> Thanks
> Yuanlong
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John E Drake" <[e-mail]>
> To: "Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon)" 
> <[e-mail]>om>; "Yuanlong Jiang" 
> <[e-mail]>om>; "Loa Andersson" <[e-mail]>nu>; 
> <[e-mail]>rg>; <[e-mail]>rg>; <[e-mail]>rg>; 
> "MPLS-TP ad hoc team" 
> <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 9:29 PM
> Subject: RE: [PWE3] [AHMPLS-TP] Re: [mpls-tp] poll 
> ondraft-he-mpls-tp-csf-03.txt
> 
> 
> > Nurit,
> >
> > As I understand the original requirement from Malcolm Betts, this 
> > capability is required for those cases in which a client is 
> unable to 
> > detect the failure of its peer.  In MPLS-TP, we have three clients, 
> > PW, IP, and MPLS, and I am quite sure that IP and MPLS clients can 
> > take care of themselves wrt detecting peer failure.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > John
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon) 
> >> [mailto:[e-mail]]
> >> Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 4:47 AM
> >> To: John E Drake; Yuanlong Jiang; Loa Andersson; 
> [e-mail]; mpls- 
> >> [e-mail]; [e-mail]; MPLS-TP ad hoc team
> >> Subject: RE: [PWE3] [AHMPLS-TP] Re: [mpls-tp] poll 
> >> ondraft-he-mpls-tp- csf-03.txt
> >>
> >> But what about other client services... e.g. adapted by 
> service-LSP 
> >> and not by PWE3?
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] 
> On Behalf 
> >> Of ext John E Drake
> >> Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 2:35 PM
> >> To: Yuanlong Jiang; Loa Andersson; [e-mail]; 
> [e-mail]; 
> >> [e-mail]; MPLS-TP ad hoc team
> >> Subject: Re: [PWE3] [AHMPLS-TP] Re: [mpls-tp] poll 
> >> ondraft-he-mpls-tp-csf-03.txt
> >>
> >> I am not convinced.  It seems like it belongs in the Pseudo Wire 
> >> application, which already has this capability.
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPhone
> >>
> >>
> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > From: Yuanlong Jiang [mailto:[e-mail]]
> >> > Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 1:07 AM
> >> > To: Loa Andersson; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; 
> [e-mail]; 
> >> > MPLS-TP ad hoc team
> >> > Subject: [AHMPLS-TP] Re: [mpls-tp] poll on draft-he-mpls-tp-csf-
> >> 03.txt
> >> >
> >> > Support.
> >> >
> >> > I believe this mechanism is needed in MPLS-TP.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks
> >> > Yuanlong
> >> >
> >> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> > From: "Loa Andersson" <[e-mail]>
> >> > To: <[e-mail]>rg>; <[e-mail]>rg>; 
> <[e-mail]>rg>; "MPLS-TP 
> >> > ad hoc team" <[e-mail]>
> >> > Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 7:56 PM
> >> > Subject: [mpls-tp] poll on draft-he-mpls-tp-csf-03.txt
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > > all,
> >> > >
> >> > > this is to start a two week poll on making
> >> > >
> >> > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-he-mpls-tp-csf-03.txt
> >> > >
> >> > > a mpls working group document.
> >> > >
> >> > > Please send comments support/not support to the 
> mpls-tp maililng
> >> > list.
> >> > >
> >> > > The poll ends Thursday Dec 2, 2010.
> >> > >
> >> > > /Loa
> >> > > --
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Loa Andersson                         email:
> >> > [e-mail]
> >> > > Sr Strategy and Standards Manager            [e-mail]
> >> > > Ericsson Inc                          phone: [phone]
> >> > >                                              [phone] 
> >> > > _______________________________________________
> >> > > mpls-tp mailing list
> >> > > [e-mail]
> >> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls-tp
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> pwe3 mailing list
> >> [e-mail]
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3
> > 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> pwe3 mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3
> _______________________________________________
> mpls-tp mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls-tp
>