RE: [EFM] OAM loop back / echo server function
Francois,
If the management is "in band" then I can not use this technology for
anything other than "best effort" type services. As a service provider, I
am in need of something that I can support "Private Line" type services for
businesses. "Private Line" is still the dominant data communications
service requested by business customers of many service providers, to
build the secure enterprise networks. Business "Private Line" is the
highest margin service in the suite of services that can be provided.
I am hoping that with EFM, edge link infrastructure can be built that will
provide remote physical layer operations support that will allow legacy as
well as legacy free service providers the ability to support Ethernet
service customers. Without EFM, service providers are having to put
expensive multi-layer systems with separate management communications
directly on each customer primese. While this may not be very expensive
today, it will not scale very well, and continuing competition and economic
pressures will soon make that unprofitable.
Thank you,
Roy Bynum
At 09:40 AM 9/5/01 -0400, Francois D. Menard wrote:
>As it is the case with cable modems today, the problem with this setup
>is that it houses the IP stack on a management VLAN which is not exposed
>through a third party access POI. I think that Link beats updates
>should propagate at layer 2 across a third party access POI. Hence why
>I am favouring at this time something that is in-band, rather than out
>of band.
>
>-=Francois=-
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-stds-802-3-efm@majordomo.ieee.org
>[mailto:owner-stds-802-3-efm@majordomo.ieee.org] On Behalf Of Geoff
>Thompson
>Sent: September 4, 2001 6:03 PM
>To: fkittred@xxxxxxx
>Cc: stds-802-3-efm@ieee.org
>Subject: Re: [EFM] OAM loop back / echo server function
>
>
>
>Fletcher-
>
>I don't think this is a stupid question.
>I don't think we need an IP level PING
>A L2 ping would do, perhaps even better, the demarc would look for PING
>type and then just swap SA & DA.
>My expectation is that the demarcation device will need a MAC address My
>expectation is that the demarcation device will probably end up with an
>IP address in order to support:
> SNMP for OA&M
> Firewall services for the subscriber
>
>(That issue is, of course, beyond our scope)
>
>Geoff
>
>At 03:47 PM 9/4/01 -0400, Fletcher E Kittredge wrote:
> >On Fri, 31 Aug 2001 14:11:54 -0700 "Geoff Thompson" wrote:
> > > As I have said before, I do believe that we will need a demarcation
> > > device that has the capability to host OA&M functions. We have
> > > talked about "loop back" from this point in the network. Let us
> > > forevermore make that "PING"
> >
> >Geoff;
> >
> > Apologies if this is a stupid question, but does PING in this
> >context mean the utility that sends an IP ICMP ECHO REQUEST packet and
> >listens for an ECHO REPLY packet? If so, am I correct in thinking this
>
> >means the demarcation device would require an IP address?
> >
> >thanks!
> >fletcher