[mpls-tp] (H)VPLS support in MPLS-TP

maarten vissers <maarten.vissers@huawei.com> Fri, 10 December 2010 14:48 UTC

Return-Path: <maarten.vissers@huawei.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 9878528C0D9 for <mpls-tp@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 06:48:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.336
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.336 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.262, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 qSlZrqv0qnsP for <mpls-tp@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 06:48:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lhrga04-in.huawei.com (lhrga04-in.huawei.com [195.33.106.149]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A31D28B56A for <mpls-tp@ietf.org>; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 06:48:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from huawei.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lhrga04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LD700CZ2VVWJL@lhrga04-in.huawei.com> for mpls-tp@ietf.org; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 14:50:20 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from LHREML202-EDG.china.huawei.com ([172.18.7.118]) by lhrga04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTPS id <0LD700MSLVVVY3@lhrga04-in.huawei.com> for mpls-tp@ietf.org; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 14:50:19 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from LHREML402-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.31) by LHREML202-EDG.china.huawei.com (172.18.7.189) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.218.12; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 14:50:08 +0000
Received: from LHREML501-MBX.china.huawei.com ([fe80::85b6:15b7:c624:8912]) by LHREML402-HUB.china.huawei.com ([::1]) with mapi id 14.01.0218.012; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 14:50:19 +0000
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 14:50:17 +0000
From: maarten vissers <maarten.vissers@huawei.com>
X-Originating-IP: [10.202.112.101]
To: "mpls-tp@ietf.org" <mpls-tp@ietf.org>
Message-id: <A361D0E6B077214489BBDC92F6294886A81F7C@LHREML501-MBX.china.huawei.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_AgAi51cY6pD4C8bD/Q59Gg)"
Content-language: en-US
Accept-Language: en-US
Thread-topic: (H)VPLS support in MPLS-TP
Thread-index: AcuYeaGzyDOcwjCWQIm6LSvQXJYbHA==
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Subject: [mpls-tp] (H)VPLS support in MPLS-TP
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: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 14:48:51 -0000

MPLS-TP networks have to support E-Tree and E-LAN services.

In MPLS, those services are supported by means of (H)VPLS.
(H)VPLS is supported by RMP and MP2MP VLANs.
The VLAN frames are carried over P2P Ethernet-PWs over MP2P LSPs.
If two PEs A and B are a member of e.g. 50 of those RMP/MP2MP VLANs,
then the LSP between PEs A and B will carry 50 P2P Ethernet-PWs. Those
50 Ethernet-PWs will each run MPLS PW OAM to detect the status of
each connection between PE A and PE B.

(H)VPLS in MPLS-TP will be supported over P2P transport-LSPs instead
of the MPLS MP2P LSPs. The status of the e.g. 50 Ethernet-PWs between PE A
and PE B can in this case be inferred from the status of the P2P transport-LSP
between PE A and PE B. This reduces the amount of OAM to manage on
the PE NNI ports.

This would imply that it is not necessary to activate (or to implement) MPLS-TP
PW OAM for those (H)VPLS Ethernet-PW connections.

Is this an acceptable (H)VPLS architecture in a MPLS-TP network?

Regards,
Maarten