Re: BFD MIB extension for MPLS-TP

[Jeffrey Haas <[e-mail]>]

[cc: mpls chairs]

Sam,

I believe this MIB is in scope for the BFD WG charter:

"1. Develop the MIB module for BFD and submit it to the IESG for publication
as a Proposed Standard. 

5. Assist in the standardization of the BFD protocol for MPLS-TP. The
preferred solution will be interoperable with the current BFD
specification."

However, there's also some argument to keep all of the MPLS-TP MIB work
together in the MPLS WG.

Most of the MPLS-TP work, including MIBs, is occurring in the MPLS WG.
Doing a cursory review of the two other drafts you presented in the same
session, there is no strong binding from the oam-id or te-mib to the BFD
MPLS-TP MIB, but the MPLS-TP BFD MIB has a strong dependency on the oam-id
MIB.  The MPLS-TP BFD MIB depends on a common index from the bfd session
table.  Given these dependencies, it seems to make some some sense to keep
the MPLS-TP MIB work bundled together in on group.

I was not at IETF 82. Per the MPLS WG minutes it sounds like there is
some debate as to which WG would cover this work.  I personally have no
strong preference as to which group is in the draft name since the BFD WG
will be providing review, per charter, regardless of which group it is in.

With that, I pass the WG adoption token back to the MPLS chairs.  We're
happy to take on the work if you don't want it.

-- Jeff

On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 08:17:24PM -0800, Sam Aldrin wrote:
> Hello BFD WG,
> 
> 
> We have submitted a new draft, BFD MIB extensions to support MPLS-TP, prior
> to IETF82 at Taipei.
> 
> The draft is located at
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-vkst-bfd-mpls-mib/
> 
> 
> We have presented the draft in MPLS WG to get feedback from that WG.
> 
> As there was no WG session at Taipei, we are seeking feedback from BFD WG
> over the mailing list.
> 
> 
> The MIB extension is fairly simple and adds few new objects to extend the
> exiting BFD MIB and support BFD sessions over TP tunnels. Please provide
> your feedback and comments, so that, we could take it forward and ask to
> make it a WG document.
> 
> 
> Appreciate your time.
> 
> 
> cheers
> 
> -sam