IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [PWE3] Starting WG adoption call for draft-boutros-pwe3-mpls-tp-mac-wd-02

Sami Boutros <sboutros@cisco.com> Wed, 08 February 2012 21:50 UTC

Return-Path: <sboutros@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: pwe3@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pwe3@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7E1121F8525 for <pwe3@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Feb 2012 13:50:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.001, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 PCGLKByvxXCs for <pwe3@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Feb 2012 13:50:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mtv-iport-2.cisco.com (mtv-iport-2.cisco.com [173.36.130.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB51921F8522 for <pwe3@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Feb 2012 13:50:28 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=sboutros@cisco.com; l=5475; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1328737828; x=1329947428; h=date:to:from:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version: message-id; bh=zyBXEXwcVrTOKxIpFyXXGTqJMRcIu3QtWtYW393kkqI=; b=GYX3iio/j7oBijtne9W4lZizVjWhEuPCAwP/cm3va38bNcgrd3oZi5Uj otKWDQ+4gw2nl94rnTbh3mpMYharYMDEU0VsAnTIZWnFLvZ7TC12rL4AB Y6Li8yYtntNDiJHrqMt2AfLRz57KPJOJsrQ0XzodeiFUiJ9jPauUa29lP w=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EAPPtMk+rRDoG/2dsb2JhbABDiCCmaoEHgXIBAQEEAQEBDwEKURsHBAQNBAEBKAcZDh8JCAYBEiKHY5pOAZ5JBIt1EwEIBQMDCSQBgw0FAxInMSGDWQSIRp9l
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.73,386,1325462400"; d="scan'208,217"; a="29381031"
Received: from mtv-core-1.cisco.com ([171.68.58.6]) by mtv-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 08 Feb 2012 21:50:19 +0000
Received: from xbh-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-231.cisco.com [128.107.191.100]) by mtv-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q18LoJrA019313; Wed, 8 Feb 2012 21:50:19 GMT
Received: from xfe-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com ([128.107.191.32]) by xbh-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 8 Feb 2012 13:50:19 -0800
Received: from sboutros-wxp01.ciswco.com ([10.21.168.208]) by xfe-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 8 Feb 2012 13:50:18 -0800
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9
Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2012 13:50:14 -0800
To: Gregory Mirsky <gregory.mirsky@ericsson.com>, "Andrew G. Malis" <amalis@gmail.com>, "pwe3@ietf.org" <pwe3@ietf.org>
From: Sami Boutros <sboutros@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <FE60A4E52763E84B935532D7D9294FF1322B3173A3@EUSAACMS0715.ea mcs.ericsson.se>
References: <CAK+d4xsSRN-t6Rc0Ea-UeoJwouaDbNGtxWAfqx5eyr6pobT7xQ@mail.gmail.com> <FE60A4E52763E84B935532D7D9294FF1322B316C3A@EUSAACMS0715.eamcs.ericsson.se> <XFE-SJC-212gC81Tbdk0000007d@xfe-sjc-212.amer.cisco.com> <FE60A4E52763E84B935532D7D9294FF1322B3173A3@EUSAACMS0715.eamcs.ericsson.se>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_60486125==.ALT"
Message-ID: <XFE-SJC-221BafD1RmS0000015a@xfe-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Feb 2012 21:50:18.0643 (UTC) FILETIME=[A60AE630:01CCE6AB]
Subject: Re: [PWE3] Starting WG adoption call for draft-boutros-pwe3-mpls-tp-mac-wd-02
X-BeenThere: pwe3@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Pseudo Wires Edge to Edge <pwe3.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pwe3>, <mailto:pwe3-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pwe3>
List-Post: <mailto:pwe3@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pwe3-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3>, <mailto:pwe3-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2012 21:50:29 -0000

Hi Greg,


>Sami: This is a requirement when deploying static PWs in an H-VPLS 
>scenario along with PW-redundancy. I don't think this can be ignored..
>  GIM>> H-VPLS is not PWE3 but L2VPN construct. And MAC management 
> is not part of TDM PW or ATM PW. I'm not suggesting to "ignore" MAC 
> Management but to address it in appropriate IETF WG.

Sami: Good that we agree that this is needed.

>>MAC Withrawal, MAC management in general, is not part of PW OAM and 
>>should not re-use PW OAM G-ACh.
>>
>
>Sami: So, how do you propose achieving this function for static PWs 
>if we don't use PW-OAM?
>  GIM>> I suggest request MAC Management VCCV PW ACH code point from 
> IANA. I believe that MAC management is not element of PW OAM, 
> unlike Continuity Check, Connectivity Verification, Loss and Delay 
> Measurement that are common to all types of PWs.

Sami: The reason we are using the static PW-OAM status, is that we 
want to use a very similar procedure here to the one we use to send 
static PW status.

Thanks,

Sami

>Thanks,
>
>Sami
>
>>     Regards,
>>         Greg
>>
>>
>>----------
>>From: pwe3-bounces@ietf.org [ mailto:pwe3-bounces@ietf.org] On 
>>Behalf Of Andrew G. Malis
>>Sent: Monday, January 23, 2012 12:19 PM
>>To: pwe3@ietf.org
>>Subject: [PWE3] Starting WG adoption call for 
>>draft-boutros-pwe3-mpls-tp-mac-wd-02
>>
>>This begins a two-week PWE3 WG adoption call for 
>><https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-boutros-pwe3-mpls-tp-mac-wd-02>https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-boutros-pwe3-mpls-tp-mac-wd-02 
>>, ending February 6. Please respond with your approval, 
>>disapproval, and other comments to the PWE3 list. If you don't 
>>support the adoption, providing a reason would be useful to the 
>>authors and the working group, but is not required. Of course, the 
>>reason why you support the draft is also welcome, but also 
>>optional. This request will be a part of PWE3 WG adoption calls going forward.
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Andy and Matthew
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>pwe3 mailing list
>>pwe3@ietf.org
>>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email