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

Re: [PWE3] draft-mohan-pwe3-mpls-eth-oam-iwk-00.txt as WG draft



Eric Gray wrote:
Just to add to what Yaakov says, the message mapping draft version currently available in the draft repository says
explicitly that it does not include Ethernet OAM (therefore
- presumably - does not include Ethernet OAM interworking).

The wording chosen in the message mapping draft appears to
be a "scope statement" rather than an editorial note (such
as might be included if this was work for further study in
that draft).

That will change shortly.
The message mapping draft is in a very poor state. Have you read it recently ? I will be done shortly with a new version , but I'm not sure we can get all the changes needed by the deadline.
What is missing:

- ATM and static PW/BFD message mapping
- Handling of Standby state.
- All ethernet message mapping.
- L2TP message mapping is broken.

Luca

--
Eric Gray
Principal Engineer
Ericsson
-----Original Message-----
From: pwe3-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:pwe3-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf Of Yaakov Stein
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 12:31 PM
To: Dinesh Mohan; Luca Martini; Thomas Nadeau
Cc: Monique-Jean Morrow1; pwe3 pwe3; Stewart Bryant
Subject: Re: [PWE3] draft-mohan-pwe3-mpls-eth-oam-iwk-00.txt as WG draft

Luca and Dinesh

Quote from Philadelphia minutes :

Yaakov Stein - this is important work. Have you also looked into .3ah? We need
   this covered too.
Nabil: I thought we did, because we cover link level defects. We need to go back
   and make sure this is covered.
Ali Sajassi: This is a very good comment. Counts for ELMI too in MEF. Luca Martini: I have asked for this years ago, and chairs did not want to put
   into. I am in favour of putting this into message mapping.
   Stewart - don't remember, but msg-map is quite mature
Luca Martini - this will generate more interest again and we can progress this. Stewart - Monique is the editor and she just refreshed it. It would be good to review msg-map, and progress Ethernet separately as some more material to add. Yaakov Stein - agrees should be separate, and not hold up message map. Danny: is there consistent terminology with OAM and redundancy drafts? Nabil: The mapping draft is most advanced, and common authors with redundancy,
   so hope they are consistent, but need to check.

Stewart: if existing OAM message mapping draft is nearly done, then keep
   separate so as not to hold up.

   Luca Martini: what will the IESG say without the lack of Ethernet?
Stewart: put in informative reference to Ethernet doc. Co-authers need to add
   informative reference, and then we will last call it.
George Swallow: The way the industry is going, the Ethernet is the most
   important part.

I think we see that Tom/Luca's initiative to merge this into the oam-msg-map draft was addressed, and that the majority wanted it to be kept separate.

I am sure that none of us expected to find two parallel versions of this work.

The decision was based on oam-msg-map taking too long.
If the present authors of oam-msg-map are now determined to push this through QUICKLY, then I am not against cutting and pasting Dinesh's draft into oam-msg-map. This may actually speed things up, as draft-mohan-pwe3-mpls-eth-oam-iwk
is not even a WG item yet.
Of course, if we do merge the documents, then the authors of the second need to be credited.
Since that would overflow the already extensive author list,
there could be 2 editors (e.g. <Luca OR Monique> AND Dinesh)
and the rest of the authors be pushed down to an author's section.

However, I would like to reiterate what I said in Philadelphia.
I am not a great fan of OAM mapping at all, and wouldn't care
if the present oam-msg-map draft died a natural death.
Ethernet to Ethernet PW OAM interworking is an evil, but frequently a necessary one.
Work on it needs to be expedited.

Y(J)S


-----Original Message-----
From: pwe3-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:pwe3-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf Of Dinesh Mohan
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 5:09 PM
To: Luca Martini; Thomas Nadeau
Cc: Monique-Jean Morrow1; pwe3 pwe3; Stewart Bryant
Subject: Re: [PWE3] draft-mohan-pwe3-mpls-eth-oam-iwk-00.txt as WG draft

Luca,

This is certainly a news to me!!! Is this already a foregone conclusion
- where is the process????

I, and so will other authors, will certainly appreciate some sort of headup.

---
Dinesh

-----Original Message-----
From: Luca Martini [mailto:lmartini at cisco.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 10:04 AM
To: Thomas Nadeau
Cc: Mohan, Dinesh (CAR:NP02); Stewart Bryant; pwe3 pwe3; Monique-Jean
Morrow1
Subject: Re: [PWE3] draft-mohan-pwe3-mpls-eth-oam-iwk-00.txt as WG draft

Thomas Nadeau wrote:
I don't understand why. It overlaps with the draft in
that area by

%100. Monique and Luca are doing the edits on the draft right now.
What would be a more sensible approach would be to review what they
are doing and see what doesn't overlap and make sure it
goes in there.

The draft is nearly ready for WG LC, so it would be more prudent to
put it there. It would also be less confusing to see
another draft on
the same topic.

I'm working on this now, I am finishing the ATm setions , then i'll include the ethernet part of this document.
Luca

    --Tom


Tom,

The draft had been structured to allow integration into the
draft-ietf-pwe3-oam-msg-map however following discussions in both
pwe3 and l2vpn WG, it was indicated that it would be worthwhile to
progress the draft independently.

---
Dinesh

-----Original Message-----
From: pwe3-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:pwe3-bounces at ietf.org]
On Behalf
Of Thomas Nadeau
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 8:10 AM
To: stbryant at cisco.com
Cc: pwe3
Subject: Re: [PWE3] draft-mohan-pwe3-mpls-eth-oam-iwk-00.txt as WG
draft


    How does this draft differ from
draft-ietf-pwe3-oam-msg-map-06.txt
which
is already a PWE3 WG item that is nearly complete?  It seems to me
that after a quick read, your document is providing the ethernet
component that was agreed to be in the mapping document.

    --Tom



We have a request to accept MPLS and Ethernet OAM Interworking

http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-mohan-pwe3-mpls-eth-oam-iwk-00.txt

as a working group draft.

The authors thought that PWE3 had already agreed to this, but the
minutes of the last meeting do not say that, and in any
case we did
not do a list poll.

Please can we have views on whether to accept as WG draft by COB
15th July.

Thanks

Stewart/Danny


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

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

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



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