IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Time] Control Protocol Functionality or OAM function

Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com> Fri, 27 June 2014 10:52 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 6BFAD1B2F4F for <time@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Jun 2014 03:52:49 -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 QfhgbftIHrFY for <time@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Jun 2014 03:52:44 -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 864E61B2F50 for <time@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Jun 2014 03:52:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml401-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id BJI21742; Fri, 27 Jun 2014 10:52:42 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from NKGEML404-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.35) by lhreml401-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.240) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Fri, 27 Jun 2014 11:52:41 +0100
Received: from NKGEML501-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.2.155]) by nkgeml404-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.35]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Fri, 27 Jun 2014 18:52:35 +0800
From: Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com>
To: Gregory Mirsky <gregory.mirsky@ericsson.com>, "time@ietf.org" <time@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Control Protocol Functionality or OAM function
Thread-Index: Ac+QVM/Atz/p97ObQgOe/NnQM2x8VwAKPbpAAF0kjIA=
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 10:52:34 +0000
Message-ID: <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABA84579BA4@nkgeml501-mbs.china.huawei.com>
References: <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABA845757FE@nkgeml501-mbs.china.huawei.com> <7347100B5761DC41A166AC17F22DF1121B7E2509@eusaamb103.ericsson.se>
In-Reply-To: <7347100B5761DC41A166AC17F22DF1121B7E2509@eusaamb103.ericsson.se>
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_B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABA84579BA4nkgeml501mbschi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/time/UMwFr44SO3l8sugNMqp4aVKhtTg
Subject: Re: [Time] Control Protocol Functionality or OAM function
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: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 10:52:49 -0000

You are right, a lot of OAM protocols have both control packet and Test packet since they are connection oriented while some other protocols only have test packet since they are connectionless based.
Whether it is connection oriented or connectionless based, OAM configuration is needed to enable OAM function and active OAM service.

RSVP-TE is not strict OAM related protocol but can be used to carry OAM information.
The question is whether LSP ping is connection oriented or connectionless based. This is not very clear to me.

Regards!
-Qin
发件人: Gregory Mirsky [mailto:gregory.mirsky@ericsson.com]
发送时间: 2014年6月25日 22:09
收件人: Qin Wu; time@ietf.org
主题: RE: Control Protocol Functionality or OAM function

Hi Qin,
I agree, that we don’t have many examples of OAM Control protocols but there are couple examples that come to mind. IPPM WG developed One-Way Active Measurement Protocol (OWAMP) RFC 4656 and Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP) RFC 5357. Each has Control protocol and Test protocol.
Then there are numerous RSVP and LSP ping extensions to configure , control OAM and MPLS-TP OAM in particular.

                Regards,
                                Greg

From: Time [mailto:time-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Qin Wu
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2014 2:07 AM
To: time@ietf.org<mailto:time@ietf.org>
Subject: [Time] Control Protocol Functionality or OAM function

Hi,:
Sometimes I am confused when we talk about Control Protocol Functionality in the data plane OAM.
Do we have control plane OAM protocol, Can BFD, LSP Ping, ICMP be viewed as control plane OAM?

It looks to me there is no control plane OAM protocol such thing, although BFD defines control packet,
I think it is still a data plane OAM protocol.

The control protocol functionality in the data plane OAM is, in my opinion,
referred to various OAM functions(e.g.,Ping, Traceroute) implemented by OAM protocols.
OAM tools can use control-plane functions in the control plane, e.g., to initialize OAM sessions and to
exchange various parameters.  But such control plane functions are not strictly OAM related.

But we do need to distinct OAM protocol like BFD from OAM information being put into data packet header or data packet payload?
Can the latter be regarded as OAM protocol as well or data plane OAM protocol? Do we need to define the new term “control plane OAM”
Is there anybody like to clarify this?

Regards!
-Qin

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email