RE: CCAMP drafts for adoption

[Nitin Bahadur <nitinb@juniper.net>]

> > draft-takacs-ccamp-oam-configuration-fwk-01.txt
> > draft-takacs-ccamp-rsvp-te-eth-oam-ext-03.txt

Do not support either of these.

From the oam-config-fwk draft:
> A new useful application of RSVP-TE is OAM configuration
> and control for transport networks.

LSP-ping was designed as an OAM mechansim for MPLS LSPs. Why do we need
another mechanism? What are the limitations of lsp-ping that warrant
this new mechanism?

> When RSVP-TE is used for LSP establishment it is desirable to bind
> OAM setup to connection establishment signalling to avoid two
> separate management/configuration steps

draft-ietf-bfd-mpls specifies how to use LSP-Ping for automatic setup of
BFD-based OAM.
We should go along the same path for Ethernet OAM.

Thanks
Nitin