Subject: [mpls-tp] (no subject)

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 17:01:06 +0800

Hi, all

   Please consider a new Internet-Draft that is available from the on-line 

Internet-Drafts directories. We are seeking to have this incorporated as 
a MPLS Working Group draft. This document was posted last month, and
we sincerely welcome any comments or feedback on this draft.

Filename:                 draft-liu-mpls-tp-bnm-00
Revision:                 00
Title:                 Multiprotocol Label Switching Transport Profile 
Backward Notify Message Packet
Creation_date:            2009-02-23
Number_of_pages:           11

Abstract:
This document specifies an extension to MPLS BDI packet to form a new
type of OAM packet BNM(Backward Notify Message) , this BNM packet
will not only have the function of informing source MEP about
existing fault in the back of path like MPLS BDI packet, but also it
may response or feedback to performance and test aspect.  And these
response or fault indication information will be encapsulated in BNM
packet by the way of TLV packet.  So it may decrease the number of
OAM type and keep compatibility with MPLS network. on the other hand,
this encapsulating these feedback or response information by the way
of TLV packet will be easy to extend OAM function to operate an MPLS
Transport profile(MPLS-TP) label switched path (LSP).

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-liu-mpls-tp-bnm-00.txt

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ 

_______________________________________________

--------------------------------------------------------
ZTE Information Security Notice: The information contained in this mail is solely property of the sender's organization. This mail communication is confidential. Recipients named above are obligated to maintain secrecy and are not permitted to disclose the contents of this communication to others.
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the originator of the message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender.
This message has been scanned for viruses and Spam by ZTE Anti-Spam system.

---

From: "LEVRAU, LIEVEN (LIEVEN)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 10:18:02 +0100

Hi This link is broken.
Please update and resend.

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-puri-pwe3-ib-encap-00.txt

Thank you

./
Lieven

From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of [email-masked]
Sent: 06 March 2009 10:01
To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: [mpls] (no subject)

Hi, all

Filename:                  draft-liu-mpls-tp-bnm-00
Revision:                  00
Title:                       Multiprotocol Label Switching Transport Profile Backward Notify Message Packet
Creation_date:                  2009-02-23
Number_of_pages:           11

Abstract:

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-liu-mpls-tp-bnm-00.txt<http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-puri-pwe3-ib-encap-00.txt>

---

From: Stewart Bryant <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 11:38:37 +0000

The draft is at

A few points

The A bit mechanism is not the mechanism that is described in the latest
version of draft-ietf-mpls-tp-gach-gal. Instead you need to define the
type to always have an TLV, but set the TLV length to zero in the
TLV header when no TLVs are needed.

We need to consider the overlap with draft-boutros-mpls-tp-xxx-00.txt
series of drafts and should look to merge the appropriate content.

I am not sure at this stage why we need vendor specific and/or
experimental types. At best I think we only need one, but
I think experiments should be conducted on the experimental
ACH code point.

There is no explaination of the operation of the CSF and
fault TLVs.

Regards

Stewart

LEVRAU, LIEVEN (LIEVEN) wrote:
> *From:* [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] *On 
> Behalf Of [email-masked]
> *Sent:* 06 March 2009 10:01
> *To:* [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> *Subject:* [mpls] (no subject)
>
>  
>
>
> Hi, all
>
> A URL for this Internet-Draft is:_
> _http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-liu-mpls-tp-bnm-00.txt 
> <http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-puri-pwe3-ib-encap-00.txt>
>
> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:_
> _ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> mpls-tp mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls-tp
>

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 14:09:19 +0800

Bryant:
  thank you for your comments to my draft ,About A bit, I think your 
suggestion is true. I completely agree you.
secondly, I see and study deeply draft-boutros-mpls-tp-xxx-00,maybe the 
encapsulation in our draft is the same as boutor's . but both function is 
different.In boutros's draft, it used to detecting defects of the path and 
lsp switching by resigning a new type OAM (FM/loopback/cv). while This BNM 
OAM packet in our draft maybe have more function by extending different 
type of TLV packets. it may not only backward notify fault to source point 
like BDI. it also have these functions such as VSR/EXR/SSM/CSF 
ect.functions which are mentioned in T-MPLS layer network. in additions it 
is very important for our solution to keep compatibility with MPLS layer 
network.
for CSF functions , you may see TIU Y.17TOM, there can be detail 
explaination and description in it .
here I will say sorry to all for last ULR is wrong.please may see this 
draft as the follow URL:
    http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-liu-mpls-tp-bnm-00.txt 
 
regards
liu

Stewart Bryant <[email-masked]> 
发件人:  [email-masked]
2009-03-06 19:38
请答复 给
[email-masked]

收件人
"[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
抄送
"[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>, "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
主题
[mpls] draft-liu-mpls-tp-bnm-00.txt - was no subject

The draft is at

A few points

Regards

Stewart

LEVRAU, LIEVEN (LIEVEN) wrote:
> ZTE Information Security Notice: The information contained in this mail 
is solely property of the sender's organization. This mail communication 
is confidential. Recipients named above are obligated to maintain secrecy 
and are not permitted to disclose the contents of this communication to 
others.
> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and 
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are 
addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the 
originator of the message. Any views expressed in this message are those 
of the individual sender.

_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls