Re: [PWE3] status signalling of MPLS PW state

[Luca Martini <luca@level3.net>]

ooops.
this is a typo. it should say PE.
the text "the CE interface down" should read "the CE facing interface down"

This is equivalent to removing the configuration.
We could remove this text , it was just here for clarification.

Luca



David Zelig wrote:
> Luca,
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Luca Martini [mailto:luca@level3.net]
> > Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 1:07 AM
> > To: pwe3@ietf.org
> > Subject: Re: [PWE3] status signalling of MPLS PW state
> >
> >
> > Latest text, including some of the feedback.
> >
> > .Pb "Signaling of Pseudo Wire Link Status"
> >
> > .Pc "Use of Label Mappings."
> > The PEs MUST send PW label mapping messages to their peers as 
> > soon as the PW
> > is configured and administratively enabled, regardless of the 
> > CE interface
> > state. The PW label should not be withdrawn unless the user 
> > administratively
> > configures the CE interface down (or the PW configuration is deleted
> > entirely).
> > A simple label withdraw method SHOULD also be supported as an 
> > alternative.
>
> Can you elaborate why CE facing user admin down you make a withdraw and not
> a status report? 
> The PW has it's own admin status so if you want to force withdraw (without
> deleting the configuration) you can do it directly at the PW level. I
> believe it is good to separate the PW and CE admin status since you may want
> to administratively close the physical port while keeping the resources at
> the PW level. If there is operational need a combined administrative status
> to make both operations at once we can easily add it to the PW-MIB.
>
> David

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