IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Time] MEP and maintenance domain boundary

Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com> Wed, 02 July 2014 04:29 UTC

Return-Path: <bill.wu@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: time@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: time@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8EBA1A0444 for <time@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Jul 2014 21:29:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.401
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.401 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fioQKnjncHNW for <time@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Jul 2014 21:29:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 603F11A0442 for <time@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Jul 2014 21:29:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml406-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id BJM07383; Wed, 02 Jul 2014 04:29:02 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from NKGEML406-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.37) by lhreml406-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.243) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 05:29:01 +0100
Received: from NKGEML501-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.2.155]) by nkgeml406-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.37]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 12:28:56 +0800
From: Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com>
To: Yuji Tochio <tochio@jp.fujitsu.com>
Thread-Topic: [Time] MEP and maintenance domain boundary
Thread-Index: AQHPlGMAPmdm9niSIEyuCBB+f0TZxZuKuO5Q//+n6QCAALNHcIAAVWoAgACzyVD//4irAIAAjVgw
Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2014 04:28:56 +0000
Message-ID: <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABA8457C54B@nkgeml501-mbs.china.huawei.com>
References: <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABA8457B6A4@nkgeml501-mbs.china.huawei.com> <53B15EED.2020701@gmail.com> <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABA8457BDB8@nkgeml501-mbs.china.huawei.com> <53B27392.4000700@gmail.com> <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABA8457BFDF@nkgeml501-mbs.china.huawei.com> <53B3519C.50403@jp.fujitsu.com> <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABA8457C46E@nkgeml501-mbs.china.huawei.com> <53B38452.4000505@jp.fujitsu.com>
In-Reply-To: <53B38452.4000505@jp.fujitsu.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.138.41.180]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABA8457C54Bnkgeml501mbschi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/time/Jm7unZOPqoJL1-DP0-dzYjR0EuI
Cc: "time@ietf.org" <time@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Time] MEP and maintenance domain boundary
X-BeenThere: time@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Transport Independent OAM in Multi-Layer network Entity \(TIME\) discussion list." <time.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/time>, <mailto:time-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/time/>
List-Post: <mailto:time@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:time-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/time>, <mailto:time-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2014 04:29:05 -0000

I see, thanks for clarification.

-Qin
发件人: Yuji Tochio [mailto:tochio@jp.fujitsu.com]
发送时间: 2014年7月2日 12:02
收件人: Qin Wu
抄送: time@ietf.org
主题: Re: [Time] MEP and maintenance domain boundary

Hi Qin,

(2014/07/02 12:19), Qin Wu wrote:
Hi, Yuji:
Thanks for pointing me to the relevant references. I will read.
I see how MEL is used in slide 36 associated with RFC5317.
It looks MEL is used to identify which part of network the fault happens, e.g.,
MEL x: Carrier1;
MEL y: Carrier1, Region 1;
MEL z: Carrier1, Region 2;

To consider the slide, SPME, section 3.2 of RFC 6371, is adapted to MPLS-TP OAM architecure.
So far, MPLS-TP has only one MEL as Huub pointed out.

Regards, Yuji

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email