[PWE3] Concern with draft-ietf-pwe3-enet-mib-10

All,

Since the PW-ENET MIB is heading for last call, I reviewed the MIB today.  I realised that the MIB does not comply to the MEF's view of Ethernet E-line services.  For more information on this definition, please refer to: 

http://www.metroethernetforum.org/PDFs/Standards/Overview_of_MEF_6_and_10.ppt <https://webaccess.hostedmail.net/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://www.metroethernetforum.org/PDFs/Standards/Overview_of_MEF_6_and_10.ppt> 

I realise that this was not the stated intention of the MIB but I would like to see the gaps closed.  Note that I believe this gap is small.  We only need to address 3 issues:

1/  defining a default VLAN for the untagged and priority packets (this may already be possible)
2/  define how L2CP protocols are handled (right now they are tunnelled).  We need to add the capability to discard L2CP packets.  I believe this is desirable on a per L2CP basis but I need to verify this.
3/  define a way to map p-bit / vlans to a PW.  The rest are discarded.

I need to review this in more detail to make sure these are the only gaps.  However, before I went through this effort, I wanted to bring this issue to the list.

Do we see MEF compliance as an objective of the PW-ENET service?

Please let me know,
Ken

_______________________________________________
pwe3 mailing list
pwe3@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3