[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PWE3] Is VCCV LSP Ping to test only MPLS PWs over MPLS PSN ?


Yes Carlos, I think your wording is more accurate. Thanks.

- Mark

Sasha Vainshtein wrote:
Carlos and all,
Adding Mark (as the shepherding AD) to the CC list.
I think that the wording you've proposed would substantially improve the readability of the document.
Tom,
Could you possibly re-phrase as per Carlos suggestion during the AUTH48 phase?
Regards,
Sasha

------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* Carlos Pignataro [mailto:cpignata at cisco.com]
*Sent:* Wednesday, November 28, 2007 3:47 PM
*To:* Sasha Vainshtein
*Cc:* Thomas Nadeau; Raman Rangaswamy; pwe3 at ietf.org; Vijayanand C - TLS, Chennai.
*Subject:* Re: [PWE3] Is VCCV LSP Ping to test only MPLS PWs over MPLS PSN ?

Hi,

On 11/28/2007 4:23 AM, Sasha Vainshtein said the following:
Tom, Raman and all,
My understanding of the original question was (please correct me if I got something wrong):

    /Can LSP ping in VCCV be used to verify the PW connectivity if it
    uses, say, MPLS-in-IP or MPLS-in-GRE for transport and the PW
    label (bound to the appropriate PW Id or Generalized PW Id FEC)
    for PW demultiplexing? And is such a verification required if the
    IP connectivity to the remote device is OK?/

IMHO the answer is:

   *
      Such a verification *makes* *sense* (the PW demuxing in the
      remote box can go wrong even if the IP transport brings the PW
      packets to the correct remote box)
   *
      LSP Ping in VCCV is the appropriate (and, AFAIK, the only) way
      to perform it.

Did I miss something?
I don't think you missed anything. I understood the question (and answer) the same way.
The relevant text is the one that Raman originally quoted, i.e.:
The various VCCV CV Types
supported are used only when they apply to the context of the PW
demultiplexer in use. For example, the LSP Ping CV Type should only
be used when MPLS is utilized as the PSN.
However, it is unfortunate that the example (intended to clarify) might be source of confusion. The key is "/only when they apply to the context of the PW demultiplexer in use/", so LSP Ping applies when using MPLS Labels as PW Demultiplexer. The wording chosen in the second sentence (the example) might not be the best to convey the intended meaning. Would it help if the second sentence was reworded from:
For example, the LSP Ping CV Type should only
be used when MPLS is utilized as the PSN.
to:
For example, the LSP Ping CV Type should only
be used when MPLS Labels are utilized as PW Demultiplexer.
I think that this does not change the intended meaning, but instead it narrows and clarifies the wording of the example, and there's still time for such wording change.

Thanks,

--Carlos.

Regards,
Sasha

------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* Thomas Nadeau [mailto:tnadeau at lucidvision.com]
*Sent:* Tuesday, November 27, 2007 4:26 PM
*To:* Raman Rangaswamy
*Cc:* pwe3 at ietf.org; Vijayanand C - TLS, Chennai.
*Subject:* Re: [PWE3] Is VCCV LSP Ping to test only MPLS PWs over MPLS PSN ?


Hi ,
Can I conclude from the below draft sections that
“LSP Ping should be used to test MPLS PWs over MPLS PSN and
it does not applicable to test MPLS PWs over IP PSN(Say GRE tunnel).”

VCCV should always be used to test the PW layer regardless of the PW
type or encapsulation, and the appropriate tools for the lower layer to test those.
So use LSP ping/trace for MPLS LSPs, and ICMP echo for IP/l2tp
tunnels/paths.


--Tom


*Draft: draft-ietf-pwe3-vccv-15*
*Section 3 : *The CV types include LSP Ping [RFC4379] for MPLS
PWs, and ICMP Ping [RFC0792] [RFC4443] for both MPLS and L2TPv3 PWs. *Section 4:* The various VCCV CV types supported are used only when they apply to the
context of the PW demultiplexer in use. For example, LSP Ping type should only be used when MPLS is utilized as the PSN.
Thanks,
*Raman R*
DISCLAIMER:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The contents of this e-mail and any attachment(s) are confidential and intended for the named recipient(s) only.
It shall not attach any liability on the originator or HCL or its affiliates. Any views or opinions presented in
this email are solely those of the author and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of HCL or its affiliates.
Any form of reproduction, dissemination, copying, disclosure, modification, distribution and / or publication of
this message without the prior written consent of the author of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this email in error please delete it and notify the sender immediately. Before opening any mail and
attachments please check them for viruses and defect.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
pwe3 mailing list
pwe3 at ietf.org <mailto:pwe3 at ietf.org>
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3


------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
pwe3 mailing list
pwe3 at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3

--
--Carlos Pignataro.
Escalation RTP - cisco Systems



_______________________________________________
pwe3 mailing list
pwe3 at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3