The MPLS WG Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS WG Archive>month:2005-Jul> msg00032



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

[mpls] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-mpls-oam-requirements-06.txt

  • From: benjamin.niven-jenkins@bt.com
  • Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 11:43:50 +0100
  • Thread-Index: AcWOSWEIEHyUbSdIR2yKdHlaJWkcJwAXtoAA
  • Thread-Topic: [mpls] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-mpls-oam-requirements-06.txt
  • X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by cell.onecall.net id j6MAXrr31667
  • X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Jul 2005 10:43:00.0885 (UTC)FILETIME=[2193DC50:01C58EAA]

Colleagues,

Following a very quick scan of draft-ietf-mpls-oam-requirements-06, I
have the following comments/suggestions.

1) In the abstract & introduction the document refers to "requirements
for user and data plane operations and management", in later sections
reference is made to "MPLS data plane".  The usage of such terms appear
to be inconsistent to me.  I tend to interpret 'user plane' to mean the
plane along which user data is transferred and 'data plane' to mean the
data forwarding plane of any plane - i.e. data plane can be used to
refer to the data forwarding plane of the user plane, or the data
forwarding plane of the control plane, or the data forwarding plane of
the management plane.  However I get the impression from the document
that user plane == data plane.

So I would suggest that either the document standardises on one term for
(what I would call) the user plane, or that the terminology section is
expanded to highlight the difference between what is meant by user plane
Vs data plane.

2) The document refers to "customer traffic" and "user traffic".  Is
customer traffic synonymous with user traffic, in which case I would
suggest that the document standardises on one term.

3) Furthermore, I am not sure what is meant by customer - I assume what
is meant is the client layer of the MPLS (server) layer, in which case I
would comment that this client layer does not necessarily belong to a
"customer".  I would suggest either replacing customer with a less
ambiguous term (e.g. client or client layer) or that the terminology
section be expanded to include a definition of what is meant by customer
and how this differs from a client layer that is not owned by a customer
(e.g. a SP may use a label stack to help scaling/aggregation, but the
same SP owns the client & server MPLS layers, so who is the customer?).

4) Section 4.5, insofaras => insofar as


Thanks
Ben

-- 
Ben Niven-Jenkins
Networking Specialist, BT Exact
  
E-mail: benjamin.niven-jenkins@bt.com 
Office: +44 (0)1473 648225
Mobile: +44 (0)7918 077205
   Fax: +44 (0)1332 578827

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