Skip to main content

Definition of Time-to-Live TLV for LSP-Ping Mechanisms
draft-boutros-mpls-lsp-ping-ttl-tlv-03

Document Type Replaced Internet-Draft (individual)
Authors Sami Boutros , Siva Sivabalan , Shaleen Saxena , George Swallow , Michael Wildt , Sam Aldrin
Last updated 2011-07-26 (Latest revision 2011-02-28)
Replaced by RFC 7394
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats
Expired & archived
plain text htmlized pdfized bibtex
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state Replaced by draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-ttl-tlv
Telechat date (None)
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft can be found at:
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-boutros-mpls-lsp-ping-ttl-tlv-03.txt

Abstract

LSP-Ping is a widely deployed Operation, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) mechanism in MPLS networks. However, in the present form, this mechanism is inadequate to verify connectivity of a segment of a Multi-Segment PseudoWire (MS-PW) from any node on the path of the MS-PW. Similar shortcoming is seen on a bidirectional co- routed MPLS TP LSPs. This document defines a TLV to address these shortcomings. Requirements Language The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT","SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [3].

Authors

Sami Boutros
Siva Sivabalan
Shaleen Saxena
George Swallow
Michael Wildt
Sam Aldrin

(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)