Re: draft-bonica-tunneltrace-02

[Eric Rosen <erosen@cisco.com>]

I  understand that  you don't  think that  MPLS, viewed  as an  IP tunneling
protocol,  is worthwhile.   But that's  not the  question.  The  question is
whether  a traceroute  tool that  works through  IP tunnels  (including MPLS
tunnels)  is  worth  standardizing.   This  question doesn't  seem  to  have
anything to do  with CO networks.  Thus I don't  understand why a discussion
of  CO networking  is even  relevant to  the discussion  of  the tunneltrace
requirements. 

Dave> I  would  also  similarly  invert  the "saddled  with  CO  mechanisms"
Dave> statement as it would appear that bringing some CO properties to IP is
Dave> what MPLS is all about. 

Certainly MPLS facilitates the bringing of some CO properties to IP.  One of
the ideas of MPLS was to be  able to bring the (few) good properties without
also bringing the (much larger  number of) bad properties.  Another idea was
to do this  while using an IP  control plane.  So I hope  you can understand
why  "let's do  OAM  the way  it  is done  in CO  networks",  and "let's  do
something that  doesn't require IP", is  an argument that  does not resonate
very well with many of us.