|
1
|
- Nurit Sprecher / Nokia Siemens Networks
- Huub van Helvoort / Huawei
- Yaacov Weingarten / Nokia Siemens Networks
- Elisa Bellagamba / Ericsson
|
|
2
|
- The design team f2f meeting last week, worked on the OAM design.
- This presentation reflects the outcome of the design team meeting.
- The draft will be updated to reflect the recommendations of that
meeting.
|
|
3
|
- Analyze whether existing IETF/ITU-T OAM tools can fulfill the functional
requirements
- Identify which tools may be extended in order to support the functional
requirements
- Identify whether new tools need to be defined to fulfill certain
functional requirements
|
|
4
|
- The existing tools are evaluated based on the different OAM
requirements and gaps (if they exist) are identified.
- Recommendations and guidelines are provided.
|
|
5
|
- LSP-Ping can easily be extended to support some of the functions between
MEP-to-MEP and MEP-to-MIP.
- BFD can be extended to support some of the functions between MEP-to-MEP
- Some of the OAM functions defined in Y.1731 (especially for performance
monitoring) can be adapted.
- The PDU format of Y.1731 includes many fields that are not relevant to
the MPLS-TP environment. Using Y.1731 PDU for MPLS-TP OAM messages,
will be densely populated with zero bits.
|
|
6
|
- Re-use/extend existing IETF protocols where applicable (fault
management)
- Define new message format for each of the rest of the OAM functions,
which are (1) aligned with the ACH and ACH TLV definitions, and (2)
includes only relevant information.
- Adapt Y.1731 functionality where applicable (mainly for performance
monitoring).
|
|
7
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
10
|
- Update the document to reflect the design team review
- Progress the document to provide a reference for the considerations and
the agreed decisions
|
|
11
|
|