Re: [mpls-tp] Question RE:draft-frost-mpls-tp-loss-delay-02
Dan Frost <danfrost@cisco.com> Thu, 01 July 2010 07:31 UTC
Return-Path: <danfrost@cisco.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 A2A783A6897; Thu, 1 Jul 2010 00:31:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.732
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.732 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.867,
BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 0yXwEwAKd4zw;
Thu, 1 Jul 2010 00:30:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com (rtp-iport-1.cisco.com [64.102.122.148])
by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F4323A6855;
Thu, 1 Jul 2010 00:30:35 -0700 (PDT)
Authentication-Results: rtp-iport-1.cisco.com;
dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.53,518,1272844800"; d="scan'208";a="127473696"
Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com ([64.102.124.13]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com
with ESMTP; 01 Jul 2010 07:30:39 +0000
Received: from isolaria.cisco.com (isolaria.cisco.com [64.100.19.13]) by
rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o617Udaw020299;
Thu, 1 Jul 2010 07:30:39 GMT
Received: from isolaria.cisco.com (isolaria [127.0.0.1]) by isolaria.cisco.com
(8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id o617UcKw021109; Thu, 1 Jul 2010 03:30:38 -0400
Received: (from danfrost@localhost) by isolaria.cisco.com
(8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) id o617Uco5021108; Thu, 1 Jul 2010 08:30:38 +0100
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 08:30:38 +0100
From: Dan Frost <danfrost@cisco.com>
To: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20100701073038.GA19177@cisco.com>
References: <AANLkTimX-ml464zkvOEjztTWIFVSDdNn0wi1FZVoRwD-@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimX-ml464zkvOEjztTWIFVSDdNn0wi1FZVoRwD-@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
Cc: mpls@ietf.org, mpls-tp@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [mpls-tp] Question RE:draft-frost-mpls-tp-loss-delay-02
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 07:31:08 -0000
Hi Greg, On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 11:32:02AM -0700, Greg Mirsky wrote: > 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. Certainly, since an SPME is just an LSP. -d > Regards, > Greg
- [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