The MPLS WG Archive

[Dave McDysan <dave.mcdysan@wcom.com>]

AS stated in other posts, doing proper testing and vendor certification,
monitoring MIB variables, and probes appear to more than solve the reported
problem. Seems like CV is just another type of probe. Since PPVPNs will be
built over tunnels other than MPLS, MPLS OAM alone does not meet the
requirements of PPVPN.

Dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-mpls@UU.NET [mailto:owner-mpls@UU.NET]On Behalf Of Shahram
> Davari
> Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 4:45 PM
> To: 'Dave McDysan'; Loa Andersson; Ron Bonica
> Cc: dirk.ooms@alcatel.be; mpls@UU.NET
> Subject: RE: MPLSOAM BOF meeting draft minutes
>
>
> Dave,
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dave McDysan [mailto:dave.mcdysan@wcom.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 1:33 PM
> > To: Loa Andersson; Ron Bonica
> > Cc: dirk.ooms@alcatel.be; Shahram Davari; mpls@UU.NET
> > Subject: RE: MPLSOAM BOF meeting draft minutes
> >
> >
> > As a service provider, I also do not see a critical need for
> > MPLS OAM in a
> > large ISP backbone or in network-based IP VPNs.
>
> Why? becasue you are providing only BE service? or do you have
> other tools? or you don't care if customer's complain? Could you
> please explain?
>
> -Shahram
>