Re: [mpls-tp] 答复: Question RE:draft-frost-mpls-tp-loss-delay-02
Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com> Thu, 01 July 2010 07:21 UTC
Return-Path: <gregimirsky@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 EFCEF3A67C3; Thu, 1 Jul 2010 00:21:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.84
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.84 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-3.457,
BAYES_00=-2.599, CHARSET_FARAWAY_HEADER=3.2, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,
J_CHICKENPOX_48=0.6, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45,
SARE_SUB_ENC_GB2312=1.345]
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 NL4HBVrr3+ul;
Thu, 1 Jul 2010 00:21:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vw0-f44.google.com (mail-vw0-f44.google.com
[209.85.212.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA5313A67A5;
Thu, 1 Jul 2010 00:21:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vws14 with SMTP id 14so408566vws.31 for <multiple recipients>;
Thu, 01 Jul 2010 00:21:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to
:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
bh=6iHkWpUKUH19L12kvRW+CmnNw5DQUj50llwo5jXXokU=;
b=cWyqGL4htbYYW2TPXk6P8+CXTBHiZ7g55nqkw9e68oVanbMHhMPDBXAfvfhY/bj493
HCxkrCguHfJH4qxxHgptF2wLA2aWoNr5fbSUYnS3gk5ebvA3NV0Gs+1FoOxNXAkSdP5u
y3X/G2pASjbD8yv9appSaNorqsSPF0Y7KlL90=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
:cc:content-type;
b=Or+1rOk6sCzdIyq/36CSEzDU5qqn05cxPOqzrShrsPNF3nW7BkRHfeHLmVK9h47CVY
/1hl1sGAIvhQf1/1e/ODHBqIRbOQhwzvwpxn77orq5aNdl8ZWtqMSsTUEanGqX5T1VOU
1vLm+IAPnxkqL+ElU8KW7ZwxwiwlPkSgcfT24=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.220.126.152 with SMTP id c24mr532087vcs.152.1277968874326;
Thu, 01 Jul 2010 00:21:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.220.96.210 with HTTP; Thu, 1 Jul 2010 00:21:14 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <OFEEF3A03F.79F42228-ON48257753.0024F8D5-48257753.00277275@zte.com.cn>
References: <AANLkTimX-ml464zkvOEjztTWIFVSDdNn0wi1FZVoRwD-@mail.gmail.com>
<OFEEF3A03F.79F42228-ON48257753.0024F8D5-48257753.00277275@zte.com.cn>
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 00:21:14 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTik8kSOXwAqQtjVl5fl1rzti1ZMhtBLeHJGdNSEf@mail.gmail.com>
From: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
To: xia.liang2@zte.com.cn
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001636c93289c9ca3f048a4e50e5
Cc: mpls-tp@ietf.org, mpls@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [mpls-tp]
=?gb2312?b?tPC4tDogIFF1ZXN0aW9uIFJFOmRyYWZ0LWZyb3N0LW1w?=
=?gb2312?b?bHMtdHAtbG9zcy1kZWxheS0wMg==?=
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: Thu, 01 Jul 2010 07:21:14 -0000
Dear Xia, thank you for the reference to OAM Req. I consider Section as special case of Segment and thus wonder why Segments are not listed. Regards, Greg 2010/7/1 <xia.liang2@zte.com.cn> > > > Hi, Greg: > As far as I know, RFC5860(MPLS-TP OAM Requirements) clearly defines that > LM and DM functions only need to support PWs, LSPs, Sections. > From my understanding, maybe the reason is because it's enough for these > two performance measurement functions to be concerned on getting the end to > end client service performance information, they don't care about the > performance information of a part(Segments or SPME) of an end to end path. > > Xia.Liang > Best regards > > > > mpls-tp-bounces@ietf.org 写于 2010-07-01 02:32:02: > > > > Dear Editors and All, > > the document states that DM and LM mechanisms described are > > applicable to PW, LSPs (p2p bidirectional co-routed and associated > > as well as p2p, p2mp unidirectional), and Sections. I didn't find > > reference to Segments or SPME. Would described mechanisms apply to > > SPME? Your clarification greatly appreciated. > > > > Regards, > > Greg_______________________________________________ > > > mpls-tp mailing list > > mpls-tp@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls-tp > > -------------------------------------------------------- > ZTE Information Security Notice: The information contained in this mail is solely property of the sender's organization. This mail communication is confidential. Recipients named above are obligated to maintain secrecy and are not permitted to disclose the contents of this communication to others. > This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the originator of the message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. > This message has been scanned for viruses and Spam by ZTE Anti-Spam system. > >
- [mpls-tp] Question RE:draft-frost-mpls-tp-loss-de… Greg Mirsky
- [mpls-tp] 答复: Question RE:draft-frost-mpls-tp-los… xia.liang2
- Re: [mpls-tp] 答复: Question RE:draft-frost-mpls-tp… Greg Mirsky
- Re: [mpls-tp] Question RE:draft-frost-mpls-tp-los… Dan Frost
- Re: [mpls-tp] Question RE:draft-frost-mpls-tp-los… Greg Mirsky