RE: draft-bonica-tunneltrace-02

[neil.2.harrison@bt.com]

Agreed Enrique.....I have asked Tom to point us to where similar
requirements that he says he is working to (or more accurately, that he
'hears') are defined.  You/I know they exist in Y.1710...since we agreed
them with other operators.....but Tom may have additional ones.  I am sure
we would like to see them now.
BTW - I find it rather sad that operator defined requirements in ITU are
somehow deemed worthless in IETF.....at least in Tom's view.

regards, Neil

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cuevas, Enrique G, ALASO [mailto:ecuevas@att.com]
> Sent: 05 March 2002 17:48
> To: Ping Pan
> Cc: Thomas D. Nadeau; ccamp
> Subject: RE: draft-bonica-tunneltrace-02
> 
> 
> Ping,
> Here are some functions to consider. I am sure others can add 
> to this list.
> 
> 1) We need a function that can detect defects automatically 
> and trigger corrective actions This function should also 
> support statically configured MPLS networks.
> 2) We need a function to detect not only LSP breaks and 
> miss-routing but also defects such as LSP replication into 
> another LSP.
> 3) We need a function to immediately suppress the user 
> traffic at the egress PE when an LSP is routed-routed. 
> 4) To support PWE3 applications, we need a function to 
> generate AIS for the tunneled circuits at the egress PE, when 
> a defect is detected in the MPLS network.
> 5) We need a function to measure LSP performance accurately.
> 6)
> 
> Enrique
> _______________
> ecuevas@att.com
> Tel. (732)-420-3252
> 
> 
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Ping Pan [mailto:pingpan@juniper.net]
> >Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2002 10:15 AM
> >To: Cuevas, Enrique G, ALASO
> >Cc: Thomas D. Nadeau; ccamp@ops.ietf.org
> >Subject: Re: draft-bonica-tunneltrace-02
> >
> >
> >The proposed stuff:
> >  - a tool that can "ping" through a LSP,
> >  - a tool that can do traceroute to a LSP
> >  - a set of MIBs that can provide info on data traffic.
> >
> >They are not some projects dreamt by some bored developers. They are 
> >required by our customers. Now, as a person who works for a 
> provider, 
> >would you please forget about XUZ standard from XYZ 
> organization for a 
> >moment, :-) and tell us what other functionality that we 
> >should consider?
> >
> >Thank you!
> >
> >- Ping
> >
> >Cuevas, Enrique G, ALASO wrote:
> >
> >> Tom,
> >> Could you provide us with a matrix (comply/does not comply) 
> >of the tools you are talking 
> >
> >> about vs. the requirements given in Y.1710?
> >> 
> >> Enrique
> >
> >
>