The MPLS WG Archive

["chasey_ch" <chasey_ch@indiatimes.com>]

few humble questions
(tell me if am wrong fundamentally):

1. why the draft doesnt talk about segment OAM though for PMP scalability as an issue?
2. why there is no mention of OAM procedure for backup tunnel (especially for facility protection when one path can backup multiple paths, hence should never go down ideally)

thanks,
chasey

[mpls] draft-yasukawa-mpls-p2mp-oam-reqs-01.txtto become aworking group document?
From: "Sheetal A. Vispute_p05274" <vsheetal@ee.iitb.ac.in> 
Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2005 12:47:43 +0530 (IST) 
Cc: mpls@ietf.org 


Hi Loa,

yes it very important to become a WG doc

cheers
Sheetal


On Tue, 6 Dec 2005, Loa Andersson wrote:

> All,
>
> In Vancouver we discussed the draft-yasukawa-mpls-p2mp-oam-reqs-01.txt,
> when aksing the room about the consensus on making it a working group
> document, there were good support for making it a working group
> document.
>
> We said that we wanted to confirm this on the list. Please
> send response to this mail to the MPLS mailing list stating whether
> you think it should become a working group document or not.
>
> /Loa
>

_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls




References: 
[mpls] draft-yasukawa-mpls-p2mp-oam-reqs-01.txtto become a workinggroup document? 
From: Loa Andersson <loa@pi.se>
[mpls] draft-yasukawa-mpls-p2mp-oam-reqs-01.txtto become a workinggroup document? 
From: Loa Andersson <loa@pi.se>

 



_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls