IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mpls-tp] Linear Ether APS-g8031

Huub van Helvoort <huubatwork@gmail.com> Mon, 27 December 2010 09:04 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 8DCA53A67A1 for <mpls-tp@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Dec 2010 01:04:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.437
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.437 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.163, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 wNIL5IHlqD6I for <mpls-tp@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Dec 2010 01:04:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ew0-f44.google.com (mail-ew0-f44.google.com [209.85.215.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EBDA3A67AB for <mpls-tp@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Dec 2010 01:04:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: by ewy8 with SMTP id 8so4136855ewy.31 for <mpls-tp@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Dec 2010 01:06:55 -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:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=LNLyeBCZCVhl7Qm+Ssy27zLtY2FQAKgRT1Mfr2TqndQ=; b=HoA1z9Ut5b7hsOaaeJ4AvrAWxjvWjHGij3ocd+BTzmuSuVDgGweHcmEk6DgnVunWES 33M+k4HITP18zPSu0yWxRqVqfCju8ec6KlenRNVWJjXiUha5Uy5p7ycopInA/sKVQIVu FrBwilr8T1Gv5PQNnAazCKEYcMkL3+4MlQ5Ro=
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:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=V+Zv038AKrE0Q3/xl15lZSw3RvyreEwHuA2krBQNmg5i00GqUdnbGnl81WYD9Gwagz ZYrjHLf3SPggMa4VnsLtfQgoOfAyThuHZm5Brri8IbxDtdQvJxm8ZlbYrZVQiZgb8A5D RCHk1gRb4Lz/VcMeCOpTczP5UH+Tk93VvzDZE=
Received: by 10.14.16.75 with SMTP id g51mr7293314eeg.45.1293440815495; Mon, 27 Dec 2010 01:06:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from McAsterix.local (dhcp-077-250-051-060.chello.nl [77.250.51.60]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id q58sm8692793eeh.3.2010.12.27.01.06.53 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 27 Dec 2010 01:06:54 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4D18572B.3080609@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2010 10:06:51 +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: Saravanan P <PSaravanan@ixiacom.com>
References: <CFAB86E936BD6440B59B8FA25A792C060DF928DB9F@IXCAEXCH07.ixiacom.com>
In-Reply-To: <CFAB86E936BD6440B59B8FA25A792C060DF928DB9F@IXCAEXCH07.ixiacom.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: "mpls-tp@ietf.org" <mpls-tp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mpls-tp] Linear Ether APS-g8031
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: Mon, 27 Dec 2010 09:04:53 -0000

Hello Saravanan,

You wrote:

> I am implementing Ether APS channel functionality over pseudo wire/LSP
> and using BFD for CCM . As per my understanding Liner protection
> switching functionality shall be implemented by two standard
> IETF(draft-ietf-mpls-tp-linear-protection) and another one is I-TUT (g8031).

FYI: G.8031 is the linear protection for Ethernet.
G.8131 is linear protection for MPLS-TP, see also
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zulr-mpls-tp-linear-protection-switching
which is based on G.8131.

> CCM functionality would be either y.1731 or BFD but EtherAps should be
> g8031 or IETF.

The linear protection uses the SF (signal/service fail) as trigger.
SF detection can be based on MT-CCM defined in
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bhh-mpls-tp-oam-y1731
or on extended BFD.

> Is this combination work in field and any one foresee interoperability
> issue?

The MT-CCM and G.8131 combination has been tested several times
by EANTC and is deployed in China by major operators in many nodes.

> I don’t see anywhere in requirement document for g8031 as an APS
> option on LSP/PW.

As I mentioned above look for G.8131, but you will not
find that in any requirement document as this is considered
a solution of the generic "linear protection requirement".

Best regards, Huub.


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

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email