RE: Re: draft-suping-bfd-mpls-fecmismatch-00 questions
"David Allan" <dallan@nortel.com> Sun, 27 February 2005 21:23 UTC
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA05478; Sun, 27 Feb 2005 16:23:25 -0500 (EST)
Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1D5VtU-0006Ch-Ox; Sun, 27 Feb 2005 16:24:05 -0500
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1D5Vrm-000502-5v; Sun, 27 Feb 2005 16:22:18 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1D5Vrk-0004uj-0q for rtg-bfd@megatron.ietf.org; Sun, 27 Feb 2005 16:22:16 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA05401 for <rtg-bfd@ietf.org>; Sun, 27 Feb 2005 16:21:54 -0500 (EST)
Received: from zcars04f.nortelnetworks.com ([47.129.242.57]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1D5Vs2-0006BV-1l for rtg-bfd@ietf.org; Sun, 27 Feb 2005 16:22:34 -0500
Received: from zrtpd0jn.us.nortel.com (zrtpd0jn.us.nortel.com [47.140.202.35]) by zcars04f.nortelnetworks.com (Switch-2.2.6/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id j1RLLhi09389 for <rtg-bfd@ietf.org>; Sun, 27 Feb 2005 16:21:44 -0500 (EST)
Received: by zrtpd0jn.us.nortel.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <1JJLSV4Y>; Sun, 27 Feb 2005 16:21:44 -0500
Message-ID: <87AC5F88F03E6249AEA68D40BD3E00BE03192DA0@zcarhxm2.corp.nortel.com>
From: David Allan <dallan@nortel.com>
To: 'David Ward' <dward@cisco.com>, zhaisuping <zhaisuping@huawei.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 16:21:39 -0500
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: c0bedb65cce30976f0bf60a0a39edea4
Cc: rtg-bfd@ietf.org
Subject: RE: Re: draft-suping-bfd-mpls-fecmismatch-00 questions
X-BeenThere: rtg-bfd@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "RTG Area: Bidirectional Forwarding Detection DT" <rtg-bfd.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-bfd>, <mailto:rtg-bfd-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:rtg-bfd@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtg-bfd-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-bfd>, <mailto:rtg-bfd-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: rtg-bfd-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: rtg-bfd-bounces@ietf.org
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: f60d0f7806b0c40781eee6b9cd0b2135
It is not detecting a control plane failure, it is detecting inconsistencies in forwarding such that synch between control and data plane has been lost.. connectivity to somewhere exists but is not necessarily correct...IMO that is still a data plane problem... Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: rtg-bfd-bounces@ietf.org > [mailto:rtg-bfd-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of David Ward > Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2005 10:48 AM > To: zhaisuping > Cc: rtg-bfd@ietf.org > Subject: Re: Re: draft-suping-bfd-mpls-fecmismatch-00 questions > > > Unfort., what you write is 180 degrees opposite from the > charter of the BFD WG and the philosophy of how the protocol > is to function. BFD is not to check the consistency of the > forwarding and control plane. We do not want to > take this protocol into the realm of control plane failure > detection system (as there are many better protocols or > protocol machinery for that) but, focus on forwarding > failure detection that can send alarms, event notification, > diags, etc up the stack. > > > -DWard > > > > On Sat, Feb 26, 2005 at 09:41:49AM +0800, zhaisuping wrote: > > Hi, all > > The purpose of FEC filter in BFD is to detect the consistence of > > the control plane and data plane. So that in the MPLS network, just > > running the BFD session(LSP-Ping is not needed) is enough for the > > defect detection. Or else such tools as LSP-Ping is needed because > > the BFD session can't detect the inconsistence of the control plane > > and data plane. > > In the section 2 of the draft, there is description of the > > problem the draft want to solve. > > >> Wouldn't LSP-Ping (or VCCV) be a more appropriate place > to do this > > >> filter verification? > > > > > > > > > >LSP-Ping does a verification on the FEC itself, so a > filter would add > > >nothing. > > > > > >VCCV is not a protocol. Just a little sideband for sending IP > > >packets down a pseudowire so that you can run LSP-Ping, BFD, etc. > > >between the two ends. > > > > > >....George > > > > > > >============================================================= > =========== > > >George Swallow Cisco Systems > (978) 936-1398 > > > 1414 Massachusetts Avenue > > > Boxborough, MA 01719 > > >
- RE: Re: draft-suping-bfd-mpls-fecmismatch-00 ques… David Allan
- Re: Re: draft-suping-bfd-mpls-fecmismatch-00 ques… zhaisuping
- Re: draft-suping-bfd-mpls-fecmismatch-00 questions Thomas D. Nadeau
- Re: draft-suping-bfd-mpls-fecmismatch-00 questions George Swallow
- Re: Re: draft-suping-bfd-mpls-fecmismatch-00 ques… David Ward
- RE: Re: draft-suping-bfd-mpls-fecmismatch-00 ques… David Allan
- Re: Re: draft-suping-bfd-mpls-fecmismatch-00 ques… David Ward
- Re: draft-suping-bfd-mpls-fecmismatch-00 questions Dave Katz
- Re: Re: draft-suping-bfd-mpls-fecmismatch-00 ques… David Ward
- RE: Re: draft-suping-bfd-mpls-fecmismatch-00 ques… David Allan
- Re: Re: draft-suping-bfd-mpls-fecmismatch-00 ques… Jeffrey Haas
- Re: draft-suping-bfd-mpls-fecmismatch-00 questions Thomas D. Nadeau
- RE: draft-suping-bfd-mpls-fecmismatch-00 questions richard.spencer
- RE: draft-suping-bfd-mpls-fecmismatch-00 questions David Allan