Re: [mpls] New Liaison Statement, "LS on work on MPLS-TP protection"

Loa Andersson <> Fri, 25 March 2016 06:28 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CEFA12D529; Thu, 24 Mar 2016 23:28:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JPr2ZT9xD8os; Thu, 24 Mar 2016 23:28:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7947912D515; Thu, 24 Mar 2016 23:28:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] (unknown []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2D512180158D; Fri, 25 Mar 2016 07:28:18 +0100 (CET)
To: Ross Callon <>, George Swallow <>
References: <>
From: Loa Andersson <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 14:28:14 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <>
Cc: Multiprotocol Label Switching Discussion List <>,,, "" <>
Subject: Re: [mpls] New Liaison Statement, "LS on work on MPLS-TP protection"
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 06:28:29 -0000


I've added the pals chairs, since pseudowire protection is mentioned.


I think a and polite polite response for information is needed,

- thank them for the information,
- if there is anything we need to say on pals work on (linear)
   protection (Stewart and Andy need to input
- acknowledge that we will complete the work on mpls ring protection
   (mention MSRP and RMR)
- wish good luck at the meeting in September

Can you compile this.


On 2016-03-09 02:48, Liaison Statement Management Tool wrote:
> Title: LS on work on MPLS-TP protection
> Submission Date: 2016-03-08
> URL of the IETF Web page:
> Please reply by 2016-05-16
> From: "Hiroshi Ota" <>
> To: Loa Andersson <>,George Swallow <>,Ross Callon <>
> Cc: Alvaro Retana <>,Deborah Brungard <>,Multiprotocol Label Switching Discussion List <>,Scott Mansfield <>,George Swallow <>,John Drake <>,Alia Atlas <>,Ross Callon <>,Loa Andersson <>,,
> Response Contacts:,
> Technical Contacts:
> Purpose: For comment
> Body: ITU-T SG15 wishes to inform the IETF mpls WG of an update to the ITU-T Q9/15 work programme to include a second amendment to Recommendation ITU-T G.8131/Y.1382 Linear protection switching for MPLS transport profile. This amendment will cover pseudowire protection based on Appendix A of IETF RFC 7771. The amendment is targeted for consent at the September 2016 plenary meeting of SG15.
> ITU-T Q9/15 has also been made aware of the initiation of work on MPLS-TP Shared-Ring protection (MSRP) mechanism for ring topology in draft-ietf-mpls-tp-shared-ring-protection-00, and has consequently re-initiated work on draft Recommendation ITU-T G.8132/Y.1383 Ring protection switching for MPLS transport profile. As ITU-T Q9/15 intends to reference and be aligned with corresponding normative RFCs, we would appreciate your assessment of the anticipated completion date for draft-ietf-mpls-tp-shared-ring-protection as the target consent date for draft Recommendation ITU-T G.8132/Y.1383 depends on it.
> Attachments:
>      Liaison