[mpls] PSC: draft-dj-mpls-tp-exer-psc
"Eric Osborne (eosborne)" <eosborne@cisco.com> Wed, 17 April 2013 12:22 UTC
Return-Path: <eosborne@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7646121F8D28 for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Apr 2013 05:22:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id evufoHlF2rKg for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Apr 2013 05:22:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.86.75]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80DF921F8D29 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Apr 2013 05:21:59 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=919; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1366201319; x=1367410919; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=b8fRpL1j+FgLIiOQAH7YrfzGFztqdUB++kLqUTN8Kk8=; b=gmWxeJZ5E+YKk0ZeLMlt5QNdeKr9VeMsEh/HtaugQj38FlUMs9cYw7ho tLJ7smMS51JYHVpBCwxkSW03bKyb0/prrET411n4MNN0mu6XR0Xnk0hGa LTLdGeNfV27LpDiaU0JMdhLDdOAG7iJTWz5nXnRNxzjw1DzbzVVouOY7s E=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhEFAPSRblGtJXG8/2dsb2JhbABQgwbBQoEFFnSCIQEEOlEBKhRCJgEEG4gMnC6hH45pgx1hA6gagwuCKA
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,492,1363132800"; d="scan'208";a="199838814"
Received: from rcdn-core2-1.cisco.com ([173.37.113.188]) by rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 17 Apr 2013 12:21:59 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x10.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x10.cisco.com [173.37.183.84]) by rcdn-core2-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r3HCLx2E004599 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for <mpls@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Apr 2013 12:21:59 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com ([169.254.9.83]) by xhc-rcd-x10.cisco.com ([173.37.183.84]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Wed, 17 Apr 2013 07:21:58 -0500
From: "Eric Osborne (eosborne)" <eosborne@cisco.com>
To: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: PSC: draft-dj-mpls-tp-exer-psc
Thread-Index: Ac47ZWRjRJBAvDu6T4ia+zSmFq3r6Q==
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 12:21:58 +0000
Message-ID: <20ECF67871905846A80F77F8F4A27572101502A9@xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.98.66.77]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: [mpls] PSC: draft-dj-mpls-tp-exer-psc
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mpls>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 12:22:10 -0000
This thread is for discussing draft-dj-mpls-tp-exer-psc. We started with -00, but there is now a -01. The draft proposes adding the EXER/RR commands found in some ITU linear protection protocols to PSC. I have also posted an alternative approach, draft-osborne-mpls-psc-alive-00. Briefly, EXER is a mechanism designed to check the responsiveness of the far-end state machine. My proposal, ALIVE, is for a similar mechanism. It works differently and thus may be more or less acceptable. The big questions here are: - do we need any sort of EXER-type function at all? - if so, are either of the two proposals sufficient? Is there a better way? - if not, is it possible to provide the same kind of testing and awareness through existing mechanisms? is this testing and awareness desirable or necessary? but of course any and all discussion is welcome. eric
- [mpls] PSC: draft-dj-mpls-tp-exer-psc Eric Osborne (eosborne)
- Re: [mpls] PSC: draft-dj-mpls-tp-exer-psc Yuji Tochio
- Re: [mpls] PSC: draft-dj-mpls-tp-exer-psc Eric Osborne (eosborne)
- Re: [mpls] PSC: draft-dj-mpls-tp-exer-psc Yuji Tochio
- Re: [mpls] PSC: draft-dj-mpls-tp-exer-psc Eric Osborne (eosborne)
- Re: [mpls] PSC: draft-dj-mpls-tp-exer-psc Yaacov Weingarten
- Re: [mpls] PSC: draft-dj-mpls-tp-exer-psc Huub van Helvoort