Mandatory Features of Virtual Circuit Connectivity Verification Implementations
draft-delregno-pwe3-vccv-mandatory-features-02
| Document | Type |
Expired Internet-Draft
(individual)
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Nick Del Regno , Vishwas Manral , Ruediger Kunze , Manuel Paul , Thomas Nadeau | ||
| Last updated | 2010-10-15 | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Intended RFC status | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Expired | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft is available in these formats:
Abstract
Pseudowire Virtual Circuit Connectivity Verification (VCCV) [RFC5085] defines several Control Channel (CC) Types for MPLS PW's , none of which are preferred or mandatory. As a result, independent implementations of different subsets of the three options have resulted in interoperability challenges. In RFC5085 the CV type of LSP Ping is made the default for MPLS PW's and ICMP Ping is made optional. This however, is a recommendation and not a requirement for implementations which can also lead to interoperability challenges. To enable interoperability between implementations, this document defines a subset of control channels that is considered mandatory for VCCV implementation. This will ensure that VCCV remains the valuable tool it was designed to be in multi-vendor, multi-implementation and multi-carrier networks. This document also states requirements for the CV type too. This draft is specific to MPLS PW's and not L2TPv3 PW. For the L2TPv3 PW only one CC and CV type are specified and the issues raised in this draft do not arise.
Authors
Nick Del Regno
Vishwas Manral
Ruediger Kunze
Manuel Paul
Thomas Nadeau
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)