Re: [EFM] RE: OAM Proposals - a ping by any other name
Roy,
Private Line services are out of scope for IEEE P802.3ah and 802.3 in
general. That said, I completely disagree with your baseless statement
that OAMinP is useless for Private Line services. I see absolute no
reason why this would be the case. However, any such discussion should
be taken to a more appropriate forum. Perhaps the EFMA would be
interested in having this discussion.
Best Regards,
Rich
Roy Bynum wrote:
>
> Martin,
>
> For packet services such as Ethernet VPN, OAMiP is useful to provide
> "Section" equivalent level autonomous fault bit alarms, or a very low level
> maintenance function such as turning on or off "Section" equivalent level
> loop back functions. This is the reason that I supported a simplified
> version of OAMiP as being optional for EFM.
>
> For Private Line services OAMiP is useless.
>
> Thank you,
> Roy Bynum
>
> At 10:38 AM 4/22/2002 -0400, Martin Nuss wrote:
> >Roy,
> >
> >I welcome your continued participation on this reflector! Please
> >continue to do so.
> >
> >The comparison with X.86 is a good one, because there is clearly OAM
> >functions in the service provider network (SONET/SDH), and then there is
> >OAM between the customer/client equipment attached to the endpoints of
> >the link.
> >
> >In the X.86 example, the service provider OAM is running completely
> >independent from the client OAMiF (the service provider probably likes
> >it that way).
> >
> >What we are looking for is an Ethernet OAM layer that can interoperate
> >and signal between an Ethernet-over-Optics network and a
> >Ethernet-over-SONET (X.86 or GFP) network, and provide OAM end-to-end.
> >After all, we can't afford to rip out installed infrastructure these
> >days. OAMiP should allow us to do that, and convert preamble signaling
> >and alarming in the Preamble to SONET/SDH signaling/alarming when the
> >preamble gets stripped as X.86 maps DA through FC into SONET/SDH.
> >
> >Martin
> >
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Roy Bynum [mailto:rabynum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> >Sent: Monday, April 22, 2002 10:05 AM
> >To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); bob.barrett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Taborek, Rich;
> >Martin Nuss; Kevin.Daines@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; hsuzuki@xxxxxxxxx
> >Cc: MSquire@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; rbrand@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >Subject: RE: OAM Proposals - a ping by any other name
> >
> >
> >Dan,
> >
> >What I have in mind is allowing the enterprise customer to manage his
> >network better over the TDM network with OAMiF. Ethernet Private Line
> >does
> >and Ethernet over MPLS should carry the customer generated Ethernet MAC
> >control frames, without modification, just like any other Ethernet
> >frames. This makes OAMiF valuable to the enterprise customer just as
> >much,
> >if not more so that to the service provider.
> >
> >Thank you,
> >Roy Bynum
> >
> >
> >At 01:10 PM 4/22/2002 +0300, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote:
> > >Roy,
> > >
> > >I am uncertain about the scope of what you have in mind. On one side
> >you
> > >are mentioning 'remote element management' which is in line with what
> >is
> > >the scope of the EFM OAMiF proposal. On the other side you
> > >mention management of the high bandwidth Ethernet Private Line and
> > >Ethernet WAN Packet networks. This alludes in my mind to a network
> > >management layer that is well beyond the scope of EFM. Actually there
> >will
> > >be some discussions on this direction in the Management Area track in
> >the
> > >MEF Technical Committee meeting this week.
> > >
> > >Regards,
> > >
> > >Dan
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Roy Bynum [mailto:rabynum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > > > Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2002 6:12 AM
> > > > To: bob.barrett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Taborek, Rich; Martin
> > > > Nuss; Kevin.Daines@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; hsuzuki@xxxxxxxxx
> > > > Cc: MSquire@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Romascanu, Dan (Dan);
> > > > rbrand@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > Subject: RE: OAM Proposals - a ping by any other name
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Bob,
> > > >
> > > > If I were a service provider, network implementer, I could
> > > > use OAMiF to
> > > > provide end to end packet network support for Ethernet over MPLS as
> >a
> > > > replacement for Frame Relay. An enterprise customer can do
> > > > remote element
> > > > management over an Ethernet over SONET (X.86) leased circuit
> >"Private
> > > > Line", because the EoS X.86 protocol with transport any
> > > > Ethernet frames
> > > > that the enterprise system sends out without evaluating them,
> > > > including the
> > > > OAM MAC Control frames. A MPLS implementation that is properly
> >done,
> > > > should do the same thing and treat the Ethernet frames the
> > > > same that X.86
> > > > does. This will allow enterprise customers to better manage
> > > > their high
> > > > bandwidth Ethernet Private Line and Ethernet WAN Packet networks.
> > > >
> > > > Thank you,
> > > > Roy Bynum
> > > >
> > > >