The MPLS WG Archive

[Curtis Villamizar <curtis@workhorse.fictitious.org>]

In message <FFFC48AEAA5F7447929F4F0D93FCC12D02B9280B@zcard031.ca.nortel.com>, "
David Allan" writes:
> Curtis:
> 
> >From my perspective there is simply OAM.

Then withdraw as an author of the framework document.  That would be
like Ohta writing the IP over ATM framework (Conventional IP or ATM
advocate).

> To date a fundamental obstacle to progressing OAM has been the issue of how
> OAM flows are distinguished, esp in the presence of ECMP. When a packet
> needs to be IP, when it needs to not alias as IP, restrictions on the use of
> reserved labels to distinguish flows and where such labels can appear in the
> stack, yadda yadda yadda. This has been an obstacle to discussing the actual
> functionality required or any other relative merits as all solutions have
> been held up to this problem first without the actual problem to be solved
> being documented anywhere.
> 
> Taking ECMP off the table as an issue by documenting at a minimum the
> protocol aspects so we can get on with the actual functionality required
> would IMO be progress. The lack of information has been THE obstruction all
> along..... 
> 
> cheers
> Dave

See my prior email.  If OAM doesn't work with ECMP as it exists in the
real world then it is just an applicability issue that needs to be
documented.

Curtis