[mpls] Doubts on draft-helvoort-mpls-tp-ring-protection-switching-03

Naveen T <naveen.thanikachalam@yahoo.in> Mon, 04 February 2013 10:56 UTC

Return-Path: <naveen.thanikachalam@yahoo.in>
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 A68D321F8449 for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Feb 2013 02:56:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.555
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.555 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.554, BAYES_05=-1.11, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id R19ldYMIdRBc for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Feb 2013 02:56:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nm4-vm7.bullet.mail.sg3.yahoo.com (nm4-vm7.bullet.mail.sg3.yahoo.com [106.10.148.134]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E58321F8444 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Feb 2013 02:56:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [106.10.166.118] by nm4.bullet.mail.sg3.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 04 Feb 2013 10:56:42 -0000
Received: from [106.10.151.239] by tm7.bullet.mail.sg3.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 04 Feb 2013 10:56:41 -0000
Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1023.mail.sg3.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 04 Feb 2013 10:56:41 -0000
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3
X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 740490.51678.bm@omp1023.mail.sg3.yahoo.com
Received: (qmail 56538 invoked by uid 60001); 4 Feb 2013 10:56:41 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.in; s=s1024; t=1359975401; bh=ncRhM5JjHK9s2sK2D2uNe65T5KsvHBXDqq7sTgDcr/I=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=n1tlQWyX0O39zh9nJFGIaeDvy6lKzKHkfU7768lW4MDRMcWwTIxF+HkigPPlQGm7I2pN/UabWOwPJjiW/lqjApcayvQBiRT1RtMA+8WDF5ee28W3mNlOAzXn3A5IEjMii4p/4XKf6hUwxIDv1Ir8fUuBXOiHqRPz3iHp6LNiUI4=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.in; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=kcdoWvYcJDuzzIeCBXwPiVe2Rz9lIsKg3J5+2ELDQRAsZ2jGrzoDC6mf/WP0d5Ds9uKhq4B0XHxteeryaPh5pv/GbLu3CeFj1VRYKSFzAJYIDxhpnGwBzH2/on0NDdTWZ9D3HdLxHfjdrSkHlrQg4sd9RUvDLX10UGHBZfo7GPI=;
X-YMail-OSG: Yi6GwCAVM1kncdeKNk2qwEJ0O1k8t4IpzrHuTE7hJ62nFjd DXDCmvHV_KEIZusbZ74GFGzIGA1iiGXR6CnWOsZnN77CkjHh1nZV5znZWw_M 8rpWqwU1jByt4yz1QxoGNjacbfgk7_.6aqgsTSkKdTetsmpcIuptnPU12rkk 85zebC5bmJ985l16ZedFTn59KhBZpxoXRVP8TKhRuurSwdAqn1y9prgpAAXe 9TSUOsi_HuI1znS76Ll_BYY0.4vaZD0Ij7wYZmKsMh04YzeQH9uqI17CKt6I o2HgIStrJtMaQ9HOURScgTH3jt4zX9pn7q7YIAtRGvV9f4uKIHLiZDzcP9Zy oRLrx77Hhcg4EZY1IRv6yis770N4zHeNwTPG5kBfx8K4nL72mVdL.iZBu05J hjJAFSC008giDZTwyiFAL_R_IWOr408z7WTn1AAwGz92QcYDRQTcCyTdL9.X 3
Received: from [115.112.61.194] by web190906.mail.sg3.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 04 Feb 2013 18:56:41 SGT
X-Rocket-MIMEInfo: 001.001, CgrCoERlYXIgQXV0aG9ycywgZXQgYWwuLAoJMS4gVGhlIHByb3Bvc2VkIHNvbHV0aW9uIHJlY29tbWVuZHMgdGhlIHVzYWdlIG9mIHNlY3Rpb24gbGF5ZXIgT0FNIHRvIGZpbmQgc2lnbmFsIGZhaWx1cmVzIG9uIGEgbGluay4gU2luY2UgdGhlIHR3byBub2RlcyB3aWxsIGJlIGFibGUgdG8gZGV0ZWN0wqBmYWlsdXJlcyBhdCBlaXRoZXIgZW5kIG9mIGEgbGluayB1c2luZyB0aGUgbGluayBPQU0sIHdoeSB3b3VsZCBpdCBiZSBhIG5lY2Vzc2l0eSB0byBzZW5kIHRoZSBBUFMgcGF5bG9hZCB0byB0aGUgYWRqYWMBMAEBAQE-
X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.131.499
References: <1359970168.93490.YahooMailNeo@web190901.mail.sg3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <1359975401.56110.YahooMailNeo@web190906.mail.sg3.yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2013 18:56:41 +0800
From: Naveen T <naveen.thanikachalam@yahoo.in>
To: MPLS <mpls@ietf.org>, MRPS Helvoort <draft-helvoort-mpls-tp-ring-protection-switching@tools.ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <1359970168.93490.YahooMailNeo@web190901.mail.sg3.yahoo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="2124734478-2066510634-1359975401=:56110"
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 04 Feb 2013 11:20:54 -0800
Subject: [mpls] Doubts on draft-helvoort-mpls-tp-ring-protection-switching-03
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Naveen T <naveen.thanikachalam@yahoo.in>
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: Mon, 04 Feb 2013 10:56:44 -0000


 Dear Authors, et al.,
	1. The proposed solution recommends the usage of section layer OAM to find signal failures on a link. Since the two nodes will be able to detect failures at either end of a link using the link OAM, why would it be a necessity to send the APS payload to the adjacent node in the direction opposite to the failure?

	2. If the switching commands Lockout, Manual Switch and Forced Switch are taken out of the equation, and assuming that a signal failure will be the only reason considered for a switch-over, will it still be necessary to use the APS protocol at all? 
Thanks and Regards,
Naveen T