Re: [Time] Fwd: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on YANG Service OAM models"

Qin Wu <> Fri, 12 September 2014 06:26 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92CCF1A0005 for <>; Thu, 11 Sep 2014 23:26:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.852
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.852 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.652, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id o_OJyUWb2f0E for <>; Thu, 11 Sep 2014 23:26:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 27E7A1A0140 for <>; Thu, 11 Sep 2014 23:26:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (EHLO ([]) by (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id BJI33895; Fri, 12 Sep 2014 06:26:51 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id; Fri, 12 Sep 2014 07:26:50 +0100
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Fri, 12 Sep 2014 14:26:46 +0800
From: Qin Wu <>
To: Benoit Claise <>, "" <>
Thread-Topic: [Time] Fwd: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on YANG Service OAM models"
Thread-Index: AQHPyz0w3Tz+hCcPY0ei/vkmJvN+mZv9DPwg
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2014 06:26:46 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABA845C2BC6nkgeml501mbschi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Subject: Re: [Time] Fwd: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on YANG Service OAM models"
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Transport Independent OAM in Multi-Layer network Entity \(TIME\) discussion list." <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2014 06:26:56 -0000

Hi, Benoit:
My understanding to what MEF is doing regarding service OAM:


MEF_38 and MEF_39 are focus on Ethernet specific OAM Module development. They are not dealing with multi-layer OAM.

But MEF_38 and MEF_39 are two very good basis to define generic OAM Management Model, we should make an effort to refer to these documents rather than develop its own protocol.

In addition,

I don't think IETF should only provide YANG syntax and semantics for other SDOs to build various technology specific YANG Module,

IETF can also build various technology specific YANG Modules and technology independent YANG module (i.e., Generic OAM Management Model).

Let me know what you think about this?


发件人: Time [] 代表 Benoit Claise
发送时间: 2014年9月8日 16:16
主题: [Time] Fwd: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on YANG Service OAM models"


Regards, Benoit

-------- Original Message --------

New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on YANG Service OAM models"


Wed, 20 Aug 2014 13:08:06 -0700


Liaison Statement Management Tool <><>


<Jürgen Schönwälder <><>, <>, Tom Nadeau <><>, <>>


Benoit Claise <><>, Joel Jaeggli <><>, "Nan Chen" <><>, Bill Bjorkman <><>, Raghu Ranganathan <><>, <><>, <><>, <><>, <><>, <><>, <><>, <><>

Title: Liaison to IETF on YANG Service OAM models

Submission Date: 2014-07-31

URL of the IETF Web page:

From: MEF (Mike Bencheck <><>)

To: NETCONF Data Modeling Language (Jürgen Schönwälder <><>, Tom Nadeau <><>)

Cc: Benoit Claise <><>,Joel Jaeggli <><>,Nan Chen <><>,Bill Bjorkman <><>,Raghu Ranganathan <><>,,,,,<,,,,>

Response Contact:<>,<>

Technical Contact:

Purpose: For information

Body: Dear Jürgen Schönwälder, Tom Nadeau, and Benoit Claise:

The MEF wants to communicate to the IETF NETCONF Data Modeling Language (netmod) Working Group that MEF has existing YANG Service OAM Fault Monitoring (MEF 38) and Service OAM Performance Monitoring (MEF 39) specifications.

MEF 38 and MEF 39 are published specifications and can be found on the MEF public website at:

There appears to be some direct overlap with these specifications and the goals of the Working Group, specifically in the area of MD, MA (MEG) and MEP definitions as found in

We request that IETF review and consider using these models, if applicable. We look forward to feedback from you on this subject.

The MEF Technical Committee meets next in Atlanta in October 27-29, 2014.


    Liaison to IETF on YANG Service OAM models