The MPLS WG Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS WG Archive>month:2001-Dec> msg00241



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]  
  [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index]

MPLSOAM BOF meeting draft minutes

  • From: Shahram Davari <Shahram_Davari@pmc-sierra.com>
  • Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 06:53:22 -0800
  • Cc: "Cuevas, Enrique G, ALCTA" <ecuevas@att.com>, dave.mcdysan@wcom.com, giles@packetexchange.net, Don Fedyk <dwfedyk@nortelnetworks.com>, Ben.Mack-Crane@tellabs.com, mpls@UU.NET, neil.2.harrison@bt.com

Curtis,
 
> ICMP is sent to detect failure.  UDP based LSP Ping is sent after an
> failure is detected using ICMP.  Why we need the latter is somewhat of
> a mystery to me, apparently to either distinguish a data plane from
> control plane failure or to to circumvent anti-ICMP religion.
> 

May be that is why you advocate that LSP-Ping could be easily extended to other types
of MPLS control-planes. 

The reason that you need LSP-ping after the ICMP-ping failure is that, the 
ICMP failure could have been due to reverse IP (hop-by-hop) path failure. So
to determine whether the LSP is down or the reverse IP path, you need a disjoint
reverse path => RSVP reverse path :)

-Shahram