The MPLS WG Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS WG Archive>month:2006-Apr> msg00027



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

[mpls] New Liaison Statement, "T-MPLS Consented Recommendatio ns"

  • From: Shahram Davari <Shahram_Davari@pmc-sierra.com>
  • Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 08:33:41 -0700

My guess: because it is not needed for T-MPLS, since T-MPLS doesn't support label merging (aka LDP).

-Shahram

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ash, Gerald R (Jerry), ALABS [mailto:gash@att.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2006 11:32 AM
> To: Thomas D. Nadeau; mpls@lists.ietf.org
> Subject: RE: [mpls] New Liaison Statement, "T-MPLS Consented
> Recommendations" 
> 
> 
> > The OAM as specified does not meet the IETF's
> > requirements for OAM specified in RFC4377.
> > Y.1711 is not suitable for environments where PHP is
> > enabled,
> 
> It isn't clear why ITU-T did not also specify Y.1713 (MPLS OAM
> Connection Verify Mechanism compatible with LDP, shepherded through
> ITU-T by David Allan)
> 
> Jerry
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@lists.ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
> 

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