OAM control

["Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>]

Hi Nitin,

Have you tried running LSP Ping on a lambda?
In practice, many data plane technologies have existing OAM techniques, and 
it is these that the draft proposes to control.

Are you suggesting that the LSP Ping echo request should be sent out of band 
and used to manage data plane OAM?

Thanks,
Adrian
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Nitin Bahadur" <nitinb@juniper.net>
To: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>; <ccamp@ops.ietf.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 9:35 PM
Subject: RE: CCAMP drafts for adoption




> > 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