MPLSTP OAM Framework

1
MPLS-TP OAM Framework

• Dave Allan (Editor)
• Italo Busi (Editor)
• Ben Niven-Jenkins (Editor)

2
Current contributors

• Annamaria Fulignoli, Enrique Hernandez-Valencia,
  Lieven Levrau, Dinesh Mohan, Vincenzo Sestito,
  Nurit Sprecher, Huub van Helvoort, Martin
  Vigoureux, Yaacov Weingarten, Rolf Winter

3
Document History

• First presented at IETF 73 (Nov 08)
• Accepted as WG draft at IETF 74 (Mar 09)
• Version 01 uploaded for IETF 75
• Version 02 uploaded for a review held on 3
  November
• Discussion continued in offline meetings at
  Hiroshima on 9 and 10 November

4
Changes from v01 to v02

• Terminology alignment with draft-ietf-mpls-tp-requ
  irements-03
• Introduction of the MEG concept
• Clarifications
• Improved definitions
• Sending packets to MEPs and MIPs
• Added new OAM functionality
• Route Tracing

5
Changes from v01 to v02

• MIP support requirements
• not support MPLS-TP OAM (i.e. no MIPs per node)
• support per-node MIP (i.e. a single MIP per node)
• support per-interface MIP (i.e. two MIPs per node
  on both sides of the forwarding engine)
• Resolution of some of the comments from Munich
  meeting (12-14 October)
• Some comments still unresolved

6
Comments Review

• Use the term PST (Path Segment Tunnel)
• Hierarchical LSP defined in MPLS-TP Framework
• TCM is equivalent to PST with 11 mapping
• Injection of OAM packets on intermediate nodes is
  possible
• to be defined in MPLS-TP Framework
• Describe OAM tools for throughput estimation
  (out-of-service)
• Both one-way and two-way modes

7
Outstanding Issues

• MEP and MIP architecture
• PW OAM architecture
• How triggered OAM responses are sent
• Do we need user-traffic loopback?
• Need to check the need for supporting two modes
  for route tracing (TTL incremental and path
  discovery)

8
Next Steps

• Close the open issues
• Complete the framework part
• Complete considerations for p2mp transport paths
• Diagnostic
• Lock Instruct
• Lock Reporting