draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-12.txt   draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-13.txt 
Operations and Management Area Working Group T. Mizrahi Operations and Management Area Working Group T. Mizrahi
Internet Draft Marvell Internet Draft Marvell
Intended status: Informational N. Sprecher Intended status: Informational N. Sprecher
Expires: July 2014 NSN Expires: July 2014 Nokia Solutions and Networks
E. Bellagamba E. Bellagamba
Ericsson Ericsson
Y. Weingarten Y. Weingarten
January 9, 2014 January 28, 2014
An Overview of An Overview of
Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) Tools Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) Tools
draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-12.txt draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-overview-13.txt
Abstract Abstract
Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) is a general term Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) is a general term
that refers to a toolset for fault detection and isolation, and for that refers to a toolset for fault detection and isolation, and for
performance measurement. Over the years various OAM tools have been performance measurement. Over the years various OAM tools have been
defined for various layers in the protocol stack. defined for various layers in the protocol stack.
This document summarizes some of the OAM tools defined in the IETF in This document summarizes some of the OAM tools defined in the IETF in
the context of IP unicast, MPLS, MPLS for the transport profile the context of IP unicast, MPLS, MPLS for the transport profile
skipping to change at page 2, line 16 skipping to change at page 2, line 16
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on July 9, 2014. This Internet-Draft will expire on July 28, 2014.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 3, line 15 skipping to change at page 3, line 15
3. OAM Functions ............................................... 15 3. OAM Functions ............................................... 15
4. OAM Tools in the IETF - a Detailed Description .............. 16 4. OAM Tools in the IETF - a Detailed Description .............. 16
4.1. IP Ping ................................................ 16 4.1. IP Ping ................................................ 16
4.2. IP Traceroute .......................................... 17 4.2. IP Traceroute .......................................... 17
4.3. Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) ............... 18 4.3. Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) ............... 18
4.3.1. Overview .......................................... 18 4.3.1. Overview .......................................... 18
4.3.2. Terminology ....................................... 18 4.3.2. Terminology ....................................... 18
4.3.3. BFD Control ....................................... 18 4.3.3. BFD Control ....................................... 18
4.3.4. BFD Echo .......................................... 19 4.3.4. BFD Echo .......................................... 19
4.4. MPLS OAM ............................................... 19 4.4. MPLS OAM ............................................... 19
4.5. MPLS-TP OAM ............................................ 20 4.4.1. LSP Ping .......................................... 19
4.5.1. Overview .......................................... 20 4.4.2. BFD for MPLS ...................................... 20
4.4.3. OAM for Virtual Private Networks (VPN) over MPLS .. 21
4.5. MPLS-TP OAM ............................................ 21
4.5.1. Overview .......................................... 21
4.5.2. Terminology ....................................... 21 4.5.2. Terminology ....................................... 21
4.5.3. Generic Associated Channel ........................ 22 4.5.3. Generic Associated Channel ........................ 23
4.5.4. MPLS-TP OAM Toolset ............................... 23 4.5.4. MPLS-TP OAM Toolset ............................... 23
4.5.4.1. Continuity Check and Connectivity Verification 23 4.5.4.1. Continuity Check and Connectivity Verification 24
4.5.4.2. Route Tracing ................................ 24 4.5.4.2. Route Tracing ................................ 24
4.5.4.3. Lock Instruct ................................ 24 4.5.4.3. Lock Instruct ................................ 25
4.5.4.4. Lock Reporting ............................... 24 4.5.4.4. Lock Reporting ............................... 25
4.5.4.5. Alarm Reporting .............................. 24 4.5.4.5. Alarm Reporting .............................. 25
4.5.4.6. Remote Defect Indication ..................... 24 4.5.4.6. Remote Defect Indication ..................... 25
4.5.4.7. Client Failure Indication .................... 25 4.5.4.7. Client Failure Indication .................... 25
4.5.4.8. Performance Monitoring ....................... 25 4.5.4.8. Performance Monitoring ....................... 25
4.5.4.8.1. Packet Loss Measurement (LM) ............ 25 4.5.4.8.1. Packet Loss Measurement (LM) ............ 26
4.5.4.8.2. Packet Delay Measurement (DM) ........... 25 4.5.4.8.2. Packet Delay Measurement (DM) ........... 26
4.6. Pseudowire OAM ......................................... 26 4.6. Pseudowire OAM ......................................... 27
4.6.1. Pseudowire OAM using Virtual Circuit Connectivity 4.6.1. Pseudowire OAM using Virtual Circuit Connectivity
Verification (VCCV) ...................................... 26 Verification (VCCV) ...................................... 27
4.6.2. Pseudowire OAM using G-ACh ........................ 27 4.6.2. Pseudowire OAM using G-ACh ........................ 28
4.6.3. Attachment Circuit - Pseudowire Mapping ........... 27 4.6.3. Attachment Circuit - Pseudowire Mapping ........... 28
4.7. OWAMP and TWAMP......................................... 27 4.7. OWAMP and TWAMP......................................... 28
4.7.1. Overview .......................................... 27 4.7.1. Overview .......................................... 28
4.7.2. Control and Test Protocols ........................ 28 4.7.2. Control and Test Protocols ........................ 29
4.7.3. OWAMP ............................................. 29 4.7.3. OWAMP ............................................. 30
4.7.4. TWAMP ............................................. 29 4.7.4. TWAMP ............................................. 30
4.8. TRILL .................................................. 30 4.8. TRILL .................................................. 31
5. Summary ..................................................... 30 5. Summary ..................................................... 31
5.1. Summary of OAM Tools ................................... 31 5.1. Summary of OAM Tools ................................... 31
5.2. Summary of OAM Functions ............................... 33 5.2. Summary of OAM Functions ............................... 34
5.3. Guidance to Network Equipment Vendors .................. 34 5.3. Guidance to Network Equipment Vendors .................. 35
6. Security Considerations ..................................... 34 6. Security Considerations ..................................... 35
7. IANA Considerations ......................................... 34 7. IANA Considerations ......................................... 35
8. Acknowledgments ............................................. 35 8. Acknowledgments ............................................. 35
9. References .................................................. 35 9. References .................................................. 36
9.1. Informative References ................................. 35 9.1. Informative References ................................. 36
Appendix A. List of OAM Documents .............................. 40 Appendix A. List of OAM Documents .............................. 42
A.1. List of IETF OAM Documents ............................. 40 A.1. List of IETF OAM Documents ............................. 42
A.2. List of Selected Non-IETF OAM Documents ................ 45 A.2. List of Selected Non-IETF OAM Documents ................ 46
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
OAM is a general term that refers to a toolset for detecting, OAM is a general term that refers to a toolset for detecting,
isolating and reporting failures and for monitoring the network isolating and reporting failures and for monitoring the network
performance. performance.
There are several different interpretations to the "OAM" acronym. There are several different interpretations to the "OAM" acronym.
This document refers to Operations, Administration and Maintenance, This document refers to Operations, Administration and Maintenance,
as recommended in Section 3 of [OAM-Def]. as recommended in Section 3 of [OAM-Def].
skipping to change at page 8, line 8 skipping to change at page 8, line 8
FRR Fast Reroute FRR Fast Reroute
G-ACh Generic Associated Channel G-ACh Generic Associated Channel
GAL Generic Associated Label GAL Generic Associated Label
ICMP Internet Control Message Protocol ICMP Internet Control Message Protocol
L2TP Layer Two Tunneling Protocol L2TP Layer Two Tunneling Protocol
L2VPN Layer Two Virtual Private Network
L3VPN Layer Three Virtual Private Network
LCCE L2TP Control Connection Endpoint LCCE L2TP Control Connection Endpoint
LDP Label Distribution Protocol LDP Label Distribution Protocol
LER Label Edge Router LER Label Edge Router
LM Loss Measurement LM Loss Measurement
LSP Label Switched Path LSP Label Switched Path
skipping to change at page 8, line 44 skipping to change at page 8, line 48
MTU Maximum Transmission Unit MTU Maximum Transmission Unit
OAM Operations, Administration, and Maintenance OAM Operations, Administration, and Maintenance
OWAMP One-way Active Measurement Protocol OWAMP One-way Active Measurement Protocol
PDH Plesiochronous Digital Hierarchy PDH Plesiochronous Digital Hierarchy
PE Provider Edge PE Provider Edge
PW Pseudowire PSN Public Switched Network
PW Pseudowire
PWE3 Pseudowire Emulation Edge-to-Edge PWE3 Pseudowire Emulation Edge-to-Edge
RBridge Routing Bridge RBridge Routing Bridge
RDI Remote Defect Indication RDI Remote Defect Indication
SDH Synchronous Digital Hierarchy SDH Synchronous Digital Hierarchy
SONET Synchronous Optical Networking SONET Synchronous Optical Networking
TRILL Transparent Interconnection of Lots of Links TRILL Transparent Interconnection of Lots of Links
TTL Time To Live TTL Time To Live
TWAMP Two-way Active Measurement Protocol TWAMP Two-way Active Measurement Protocol
skipping to change at page 9, line 16 skipping to change at page 9, line 22
SONET Synchronous Optical Networking SONET Synchronous Optical Networking
TRILL Transparent Interconnection of Lots of Links TRILL Transparent Interconnection of Lots of Links
TTL Time To Live TTL Time To Live
TWAMP Two-way Active Measurement Protocol TWAMP Two-way Active Measurement Protocol
VCCV Virtual Circuit Connectivity Verification VCCV Virtual Circuit Connectivity Verification
VPN Virtual Private Network
2.2. Terminology used in OAM Standards 2.2. Terminology used in OAM Standards
2.2.1. General Terms 2.2.1. General Terms
A wide variety of terms is used in various OAM standards. This A wide variety of terms is used in various OAM standards. This
section presents a comparison of the terms used in various OAM section presents a comparison of the terms used in various OAM
standards, without fully quoting the definition of each term. standards, without fully quoting the definition of each term.
An interesting overview of the term OAM and its derivatives is An interesting overview of the term OAM and its derivatives is
presented in [OAM-Def]. A thesaurus of terminology for MPLS-TP terms presented in [OAM-Def]. A thesaurus of terminology for MPLS-TP terms
skipping to change at page 19, line 33 skipping to change at page 19, line 33
MPLS-TP. MPLS-TP.
4.4. MPLS OAM 4.4. MPLS OAM
The IETF MPLS working group has defined OAM for MPLS LSPs. The The IETF MPLS working group has defined OAM for MPLS LSPs. The
requirements and framework of this effort are defined in requirements and framework of this effort are defined in
[MPLS-OAM-FW] and [MPLS-OAM], respectively. The corresponding OAM [MPLS-OAM-FW] and [MPLS-OAM], respectively. The corresponding OAM
tool defined, in this context, is LSP Ping [LSP-Ping]. OAM for P2MP tool defined, in this context, is LSP Ping [LSP-Ping]. OAM for P2MP
services is defined in [MPLS-P2MP]. services is defined in [MPLS-P2MP].
BFD for MPLS [BFD-LSP] is an alternative means for detecting data-
plane failures, as described below.
4.4.1. LSP Ping
LSP Ping is modeled after the Ping/Traceroute paradigm and thus it LSP Ping is modeled after the Ping/Traceroute paradigm and thus it
may be used in one of two modes: may be used in one of two modes:
o "Ping" mode: In this mode LSP Ping is used for end-to-end o "Ping" mode: In this mode LSP Ping is used for end-to-end
connectivity verification between two LERs. connectivity verification between two LERs.
o "Traceroute" mode: This mode is used for hop-by-hop fault o "Traceroute" mode: This mode is used for hop-by-hop fault
isolation. isolation.
LSP Ping extends the basic ICMP Ping operation (of data-plane LSP Ping is based on ICMP Ping operation (of data-plane connectivity
connectivity verification) with functionality to verify data-plane verification) with additional functionality to verify data-plane vs.
vs. control-plane consistency for a Forwarding Equivalence Class control-plane consistency for a Forwarding Equivalence Class (FEC)
(FEC) and also Maximum Transmission Unit (MTU) problems. and also Maximum Transmission Unit (MTU) problems.
The Traceroute functionality may be used to isolate and localize the The Traceroute functionality may be used to isolate and localize the
MPLS faults, using the Time-to-live (TTL) indicator to incrementally MPLS faults, using the Time-to-live (TTL) indicator to incrementally
identify the sub-path of the LSP that is successfully traversed identify the sub-path of the LSP that is successfully traversed
before the faulty link or node. before the faulty link or node.
The challenge in MPLS networks is that the traffic of a given LSP may The challenge in MPLS networks is that the traffic of a given LSP may
be load balanced across Equal Cost Multiple paths (ECMP). LSP Ping be load balanced across Equal Cost Multiple paths (ECMP). LSP Ping
monitors all the available paths of an LSP by monitoring its monitors all the available paths of an LSP by monitoring its
different Forwarding Equivalence Classes (FEC). Conversely, MPLS-TP different Forwarding Equivalence Classes (FEC). Note that MPLS-TP
does not use ECMP, and thus does not require OAM over multiple paths. does not use ECMP, and thus does not require OAM over multiple paths.
Another challenge is that an MPLS LSP does not necessarily have a Another challenge is that an MPLS LSP does not necessarily have a
return path, and thus responding to an LSP Ping message is not return path; traffic that is sent back from the egress LSR to the
necessarily as trivial as in IP Ping, where the responder just swaps ingress LSR is not necessarily sent over an MPLS LSP, but can be sent
the source and destination IP addresses. Note that this challenge is through a different route, such as an IP route. Thus, responding to
not applicable to MPLS-TP, where a return path is always available. an LSP Ping message is not necessarily as trivial as in IP Ping,
where the responder just swaps the source and destination IP
addresses. Note that this challenge is not applicable to MPLS-TP,
where a return path is always available.
It should be noted that LSP Ping supports unique identification of It should be noted that LSP Ping supports unique identification of
the LSP within an addressing domain. The identification is checked the LSP within an addressing domain. The identification is checked
using the full FEC identification. LSP Ping is easily extensible to using the full FEC identification. LSP Ping is easily extensible to
include additional information needed to support new functionality, include additional information needed to support new functionality,
by use of Type-Length-Value (TLV) constructs. The usage of TLVs is by use of Type-Length-Value (TLV) constructs. The usage of TLVs is
typically not easy to perform in hardware, and is thus typically typically not easy to perform in hardware, and is thus typically
handled by the control plane. handled by the control plane.
LSP Ping supports both asynchronous, as well as, on-demand LSP Ping supports both asynchronous, as well as, on-demand
activation. activation.
4.4.2. BFD for MPLS
BFD [BFD-LSP] can be used to detect MPLS LSP data plane failures.
A BFD session is established for each MPLS LSP that is being
monitored. BFD Control packets must be sent along the same path as
the monitored LSP. If the LSP is associated with multiple FECs, a BFD
session is established for each FEC.
While LSP Ping can be used for detecting MPLS data plane failures and
for verifying the MPLS LSP data plane against the control plane, BFD
can only be used for the former. The advantage of BFD is that it can
provide faster failure detection, and scales better to a large number
of LSPs. Thus, a combination of LSP Ping and BFD can provide the
advantages of BFD, as well as allow to verify the data plane against
the control plane.
4.4.3. OAM for Virtual Private Networks (VPN) over MPLS
The IETF has defined two classes of VPNs, Layer 2 VPNs (L2VPN) and
Layer 3 VPNs (L3VPN). [L2VPN-OAM] provides the requirements and
framework for OAM in the context of Layer 2 Virtual Private Networks
(L2VPN), and specifically it also defines the OAM layering of L2VPNs
over MPLS. [L3VPN-OAM] provides a framework for the operation and
management of Layer 3 Virtual Private Networks (L3VPNs).
4.5. MPLS-TP OAM 4.5. MPLS-TP OAM
4.5.1. Overview 4.5.1. Overview
The MPLS working group has defined the OAM toolset that fulfills the The MPLS working group has defined the OAM toolset that fulfills the
requirements for MPLS-TP OAM. The full set of requirements for MPLS- requirements for MPLS-TP OAM. The full set of requirements for MPLS-
TP OAM are defined in [MPLS-TP-OAM], and include both general TP OAM are defined in [MPLS-TP-OAM], and include both general
requirements for the behavior of the OAM tools and a set of requirements for the behavior of the OAM tools and a set of
operations that should be supported by the OAM toolset. The set of operations that should be supported by the OAM toolset. The set of
mechanisms required are further elaborated in [TP-OAM-FW], which mechanisms required are further elaborated in [TP-OAM-FW], which
skipping to change at page 26, line 27 skipping to change at page 27, line 16
measure the delay, as well as the delay variation. Delay measurement measure the delay, as well as the delay variation. Delay measurement
is performed by exchanging timestamped OAM packets between the is performed by exchanging timestamped OAM packets between the
participating MEPs. participating MEPs.
4.6. Pseudowire OAM 4.6. Pseudowire OAM
4.6.1. Pseudowire OAM using Virtual Circuit Connectivity Verification 4.6.1. Pseudowire OAM using Virtual Circuit Connectivity Verification
(VCCV) (VCCV)
VCCV, as defined in [VCCV], provides a means for end-to-end fault VCCV, as defined in [VCCV], provides a means for end-to-end fault
detection and diagnostics tools to be extended for PWs (regardless of detection and diagnostics tools to be used for PWs (regardless of the
the underlying tunneling technology). The VCCV switching function underlying tunneling technology). The VCCV switching function
provides a control channel associated with each PW. [VCCV] defines provides a control channel associated with each PW. [VCCV] defines
three Control Channel (CC) types, i.e., three possible methods for three Control Channel (CC) types, i.e., three possible methods for
transmitting and identifying OAM messages: transmitting and identifying OAM messages:
o CC Type 1: In-band VCCV, as described in [VCCV], is also referred o CC Type 1: In-band VCCV, as described in [VCCV], is also referred
to as "PWE3 Control Word with 0001b as first nibble". It uses the to as "PWE3 Control Word with 0001b as first nibble". It uses the
PW Associated Channel Header [PW-ACH]. PW Associated Channel Header [PW-ACH].
o CC Type 2: Out-of-band VCCV [VCCV], is also referred to as "MPLS o CC Type 2: Out-of-band VCCV [VCCV], is also referred to as "MPLS
Router Alert Label". In this case the control channel is created Router Alert Label". In this case the control channel is created
skipping to change at page 27, line 13 skipping to change at page 27, line 50
signal the AC status. The use of the VCCV control channel provides signal the AC status. The use of the VCCV control channel provides
the context, based on the MPLS-PW label, required to bind and the context, based on the MPLS-PW label, required to bind and
bootstrap the BFD session to a particular pseudo wire (FEC), bootstrap the BFD session to a particular pseudo wire (FEC),
eliminating the need to exchange Discriminator values. eliminating the need to exchange Discriminator values.
VCCV consists of two components: (1) signaled component to VCCV consists of two components: (1) signaled component to
communicate VCCV capabilities as part of VC label, and (2) switching communicate VCCV capabilities as part of VC label, and (2) switching
component to cause the PW payload to be treated as a control packet. component to cause the PW payload to be treated as a control packet.
VCCV is not directly dependent upon the presence of a control plane. VCCV is not directly dependent upon the presence of a control plane.
The VCCV capability negotiation may be performed as part of the PW The VCCV capability advertisement may be performed as part of the PW
signaling when LDP is used. In case of manual configuration of the signaling when LDP is used. In case of manual configuration of the
PW, it is the responsibility of the operator to set consistent PW, it is the responsibility of the operator to set consistent
options at both ends. The manual option was created specifically to options at both ends. The manual option was created specifically to
handle MPLS-TP use cases where no control plane was a requirement. handle MPLS-TP use cases where no control plane was a requirement.
However, new use cases such as pure mobile backhaul find this However, new use cases such as pure mobile backhaul find this
functionality useful too. functionality useful too.
The PWE3 working group has conducted an implementation survey of VCCV The PWE3 working group has conducted an implementation survey of VCCV
[VCCV-SURVEY], which analyzes which VCCV mechanisms are used in [VCCV-SURVEY], which analyzes which VCCV mechanisms are used in
practice. practice.
skipping to change at page 27, line 42 skipping to change at page 28, line 31
4.6.3. Attachment Circuit - Pseudowire Mapping 4.6.3. Attachment Circuit - Pseudowire Mapping
The PWE3 working group has defined a mapping and notification of The PWE3 working group has defined a mapping and notification of
defect states between a pseudowire (PW) and the Attachment Circuits defect states between a pseudowire (PW) and the Attachment Circuits
(ACs) of the end-to-end emulated service. This mapping is of key (ACs) of the end-to-end emulated service. This mapping is of key
importance to the end-to-end functionality. Specifically, the mapping importance to the end-to-end functionality. Specifically, the mapping
is provided by [PW-MAP], by [L2TP-EC] for L2TPv3 pseudowires, and is provided by [PW-MAP], by [L2TP-EC] for L2TPv3 pseudowires, and
Section 5.3 of [ATM-L2] for ATM. Section 5.3 of [ATM-L2] for ATM.
[L2VPN-OAM] provides the requirements and framework for OAM in the
context of Layer 2 Virtual Private Networks (L2VPN), and specifically
it also defines the OAM layering of L2VPNs over pseudowires.
The mapping defined in [Eth-Int] allows an end-to-end emulated
Ethernet service over pseudowires.
4.7. OWAMP and TWAMP 4.7. OWAMP and TWAMP
4.7.1. Overview 4.7.1. Overview
The IPPM working group in the IETF defines common criteria and The IPPM working group in the IETF defines common criteria and
metrics for measuring performance of IP traffic ([IPPM-FW]). Some of metrics for measuring performance of IP traffic ([IPPM-FW]). Some of
the key RFCs published by this working group have defined metrics for the key RFCs published by this working group have defined metrics for
measuring connectivity [IPPM-Con], delay ([IPPM-1DM], [IPPM-2DM]), measuring connectivity [IPPM-Con], delay ([IPPM-1DM], [IPPM-2DM]),
and packet loss [IPPM-1LM]. It should be noted that the work of the and packet loss [IPPM-1LM]. It should be noted that the work of the
IETF in the context of performance metrics is not limited to IP IETF in the context of performance metrics is not limited to IP
skipping to change at page 32, line 6 skipping to change at page 32, line 41
| | encapsulation types, network | | | | encapsulation types, network | |
| | environments, and in various medium | | | | environments, and in various medium | |
| | types. | | | | types. | |
+-----------+------------------------------------------+------------+ +-----------+------------------------------------------+------------+
|MPLS OAM | MPLS LSP Ping, as defined in [MPLS-OAM], | MPLS | |MPLS OAM | MPLS LSP Ping, as defined in [MPLS-OAM], | MPLS |
| | [MPLS-OAM-FW] and [LSP-Ping], is an OAM | | | | [MPLS-OAM-FW] and [LSP-Ping], is an OAM | |
| | tool for point-to-point and | | | | tool for point-to-point and | |
| | point-to-multipoint MLPS LSPs. | | | | point-to-multipoint MLPS LSPs. | |
| | It includes two main functions: Ping and | | | | It includes two main functions: Ping and | |
| | Traceroute. | | | | Traceroute. | |
| | It is noted that while this category | | | | BFD [BFD-LSP] is an alternative means for| |
| | focuses on LSP Ping, other OAM tools | | | | detecting MPLS LSP data plane failures. | |
| | can be used in MPLS networks, e.g., BFD. | |
+-----------+------------------------------------------+------------+ +-----------+------------------------------------------+------------+
|MPLS-TP OAM| MPLS-TP OAM is defined in a set of RFCs. | MPLS-TP | |MPLS-TP OAM| MPLS-TP OAM is defined in a set of RFCs. | MPLS-TP |
| | The OAM requirements for MPLS Transport | | | | The OAM requirements for MPLS Transport | |
| | Profile (MPLS-TP) are defined in | | | | Profile (MPLS-TP) are defined in | |
| | [MPLS-TP-OAM]. Each of the tools in the | | | | [MPLS-TP-OAM]. Each of the tools in the | |
| | OAM toolset is defined in its own RFC, as| | | | OAM toolset is defined in its own RFC, as| |
| | specified in Section A.1. | | | | specified in Section A.1. | |
+-----------+------------------------------------------+------------+ +-----------+------------------------------------------+------------+
|Pseudowire | The PWE3 OAM architecture defines control| Pseudowire | |Pseudowire | The PWE3 OAM architecture defines control| Pseudowire |
|OAM | channels that support the use of existing| | |OAM | channels that support the use of existing| |
skipping to change at page 35, line 8 skipping to change at page 35, line 46
the Security Considerations section of each document referenced by the Security Considerations section of each document referenced by
this memo. this memo.
7. IANA Considerations 7. IANA Considerations
There are no new IANA considerations implied by this document. There are no new IANA considerations implied by this document.
8. Acknowledgments 8. Acknowledgments
The authors gratefully acknowledge Sasha Vainshtein, Carlos The authors gratefully acknowledge Sasha Vainshtein, Carlos
Pignataro, David Harrington, Dan Romascanu, Ron Bonica and other Pignataro, David Harrington, Dan Romascanu, Ron Bonica, Benoit
members of the OPSAWG mailing list for their helpful comments. Claise, Stewart Bryant, Tom Nadeau, Elwyn Davies, Al Morton, Sam
Aldrin, Thomas Narten, and other members of the OPSA WG for their
helpful comments on the mailing list.
This document was prepared using 2-Word-v2.0.template.dot. This document was prepared using 2-Word-v2.0.template.dot.
9. References 9. References
9.1. Informative References 9.1. Informative References
[ATM-L2] Singh, S., Townsley, M., and C. Pignataro, [ATM-L2] Singh, S., Townsley, M., and C. Pignataro,
"Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) over Layer 2 "Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) over Layer 2
Tunneling Protocol Version 3 (L2TPv3)", RFC 4454, May Tunneling Protocol Version 3 (L2TPv3)", RFC 4454, May
skipping to change at page 36, line 5 skipping to change at page 36, line 47
Detection (BFD) for the Pseudowire Virtual Circuit Detection (BFD) for the Pseudowire Virtual Circuit
Connectivity Verification (VCCV)", RFC 5885, June Connectivity Verification (VCCV)", RFC 5885, June
2010. 2010.
[Comp] Bonaventure, O., "Computer Networking: Principles, [Comp] Bonaventure, O., "Computer Networking: Principles,
Protocols and Practice", 2008. Protocols and Practice", 2008.
[Dup] Uijterwaal, H., "A One-Way Packet Duplication Metric", [Dup] Uijterwaal, H., "A One-Way Packet Duplication Metric",
RFC 5560, May 2009. RFC 5560, May 2009.
[Eth-Int] Mohan, D., Bitar, N., Sajassi, A., Delord, S., Niger,
P., Qiu, R., "MPLS and Ethernet Operations,
Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) Interworking",
RFC 7023, October 2013.
[G-ACh] Bocci, M., Vigoureux, M., Bryant, S., "MPLS Generic [G-ACh] Bocci, M., Vigoureux, M., Bryant, S., "MPLS Generic
Associated Channel", RFC 5586, June 2009. Associated Channel", RFC 5586, June 2009.
[ICMP-Ext] Bonica, R., Gan, D., Tappan, D., Pignataro, C., "ICMP [ICMP-Ext] Bonica, R., Gan, D., Tappan, D., Pignataro, C., "ICMP
Extensions for Multiprotocol Label Switching", RFC Extensions for Multiprotocol Label Switching", RFC
4950, August 2007. 4950, August 2007.
[ICMP-Int] Atlas, A., Bonica, R., Pignataro, C., Shen, N., Rivers, [ICMP-Int] Atlas, A., Bonica, R., Pignataro, C., Shen, N., Rivers,
JR., "Extending ICMP for Interface and Next-Hop JR., "Extending ICMP for Interface and Next-Hop
Identification", RFC 5837, April 2010. Identification", RFC 5837, April 2010.
skipping to change at page 37, line 39 skipping to change at page 38, line 39
[ITU-T-Y1731] ITU-T Recommendation G.8013/Y.1731, "OAM Functions and [ITU-T-Y1731] ITU-T Recommendation G.8013/Y.1731, "OAM Functions and
Mechanisms for Ethernet-based Networks", July 2011. Mechanisms for Ethernet-based Networks", July 2011.
[ITU-Terms] ITU-R/ITU-T Terms and Definitions, online, 2013. [ITU-Terms] ITU-R/ITU-T Terms and Definitions, online, 2013.
[L2TP-EC] McGill, N. and C. Pignataro, "Layer 2 Tunneling [L2TP-EC] McGill, N. and C. Pignataro, "Layer 2 Tunneling
Protocol Version 3 (L2TPv3) Extended Circuit Status Protocol Version 3 (L2TPv3) Extended Circuit Status
Values", RFC 5641, August 2009. Values", RFC 5641, August 2009.
[L2VPN-OAM] Sajassi, A., Mohan, D., "Layer 2 Virtual Private
Network (L2VPN) Operations, Administration, and
Maintenance (OAM) Requirements and Framework", RFC
6136, March 2011.
[L3VPN-OAM] El Mghazli, Y., Nadeau, T., Boucadair, M., Chan, K.,
Gonguet, A., "Framework for Layer 3 Virtual Private
Networks (L3VPN) Operations and Management", RFC 4176,
October 2005.
[Lock-Loop] Boutros, S., Sivabalan, S., Aggarwal, R., Vigoureux, [Lock-Loop] Boutros, S., Sivabalan, S., Aggarwal, R., Vigoureux,
M., Dai, X., "MPLS Transport Profile Lock Instruct and M., Dai, X., "MPLS Transport Profile Lock Instruct and
Loopback Functions", RFC 6435, November 2011. Loopback Functions", RFC 6435, November 2011.
[LSP-Ping] Kompella, K., Swallow, G., "Detecting Multi-Protocol [LSP-Ping] Kompella, K., Swallow, G., "Detecting Multi-Protocol
Label Switched (MPLS) Data Plane Failures", RFC 4379, Label Switched (MPLS) Data Plane Failures", RFC 4379,
February 2006. February 2006.
[Mng] Farrel, A., "Inclusion of Manageability Sections in [Mng] Farrel, A., "Inclusion of Manageability Sections in
Path Computation Element (PCE) Working Group Drafts", Path Computation Element (PCE) Working Group Drafts",
skipping to change at page 43, line 7 skipping to change at page 44, line 15
| | Detecting Multi-Protocol Label | RFC 4379 | | | Detecting Multi-Protocol Label | RFC 4379 |
| | Switched (MPLS) Data Plane Failures | | | | Switched (MPLS) Data Plane Failures | |
| | [LSP-Ping] | | | | [LSP-Ping] | |
| +--------------------------------------+----------+ | +--------------------------------------+----------+
| | Operations and Management (OAM) | RFC 4687 | | | Operations and Management (OAM) | RFC 4687 |
| | Requirements for Point-to-Multipoint | | | | Requirements for Point-to-Multipoint | |
| | MPLS Networks [MPLS-P2MP] | | | | MPLS Networks [MPLS-P2MP] | |
| +--------------------------------------+----------+ | +--------------------------------------+----------+
| | ICMP Extensions for Multiprotocol | RFC 4950 | | | ICMP Extensions for Multiprotocol | RFC 4950 |
| | Label Switching [ICMP-Ext] | | | | Label Switching [ICMP-Ext] | |
| +--------------------------------------+----------+
| | Bidirectional Forwarding Detection | RFC 5884 |
| | for MPLS Label Switched Paths (LSPs) | |
| | [BFD-LSP] | |
+-----------+--------------------------------------+----------+ +-----------+--------------------------------------+----------+
|MPLS-TP | Requirements for OAM in MPLS-TP | RFC 5860 | |MPLS-TP | Requirements for OAM in MPLS-TP | RFC 5860 |
|OAM | [MPLS-TP-OAM] | | |OAM | [MPLS-TP-OAM] | |
| +--------------------------------------+----------+ | +--------------------------------------+----------+
| | MPLS Generic Associated Channel | RFC 5586 | | | MPLS Generic Associated Channel | RFC 5586 |
| | [G-ACh] | | | | [G-ACh] | |
| +--------------------------------------+----------+ | +--------------------------------------+----------+
| | MPLS-TP OAM Framework | RFC 6371 | | | MPLS-TP OAM Framework | RFC 6371 |
| | [TP-OAM-FW] | | | | [TP-OAM-FW] | |
| +--------------------------------------+----------+ | +--------------------------------------+----------+
skipping to change at page 44, line 17 skipping to change at page 45, line 29
| | [BFD-VCCV] | | | | [BFD-VCCV] | |
| +--------------------------------------+----------+ | +--------------------------------------+----------+
| | Using the Generic Associated Channel | RFC 6423 | | | Using the Generic Associated Channel | RFC 6423 |
| | Label for Pseudowire in the MPLS | | | | Label for Pseudowire in the MPLS | |
| | Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) | | | | Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) | |
| | [PW-G-ACh] | | | | [PW-G-ACh] | |
| +--------------------------------------+----------+ | +--------------------------------------+----------+
| | Pseudowire (PW) Operations, | RFC 6310 | | | Pseudowire (PW) Operations, | RFC 6310 |
| | Administration, and Maintenance (OAM)| | | | Administration, and Maintenance (OAM)| |
| | Message Mapping [PW-MAP] | | | | Message Mapping [PW-MAP] | |
| +--------------------------------------+----------+
| | MPLS and Ethernet Operations, | RFC 7023 |
| | Administration, and Maintenance (OAM)| |
| | Interworking [Eth-Int] | |
+-----------+--------------------------------------+----------+ +-----------+--------------------------------------+----------+
|OWAMP and | A One-way Active Measurement Protocol| RFC 4656 | |OWAMP and | A One-way Active Measurement Protocol| RFC 4656 |
|TWAMP | [OWAMP] | | |TWAMP | [OWAMP] | |
| +--------------------------------------+----------+ | +--------------------------------------+----------+
| | A Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol| RFC 5357 | | | A Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol| RFC 5357 |
| | [TWAMP] | | | | [TWAMP] | |
| +--------------------------------------+----------+ | +--------------------------------------+----------+
| | Framework for IP Performance Metrics | RFC 2330 | | | Framework for IP Performance Metrics | RFC 2330 |
| | [IPPM-FW] | | | | [IPPM-FW] | |
| +--------------------------------------+----------+ | +--------------------------------------+----------+
skipping to change at page 47, line 41 skipping to change at page 49, line 17
Tal Mizrahi Tal Mizrahi
Marvell Marvell
6 Hamada St. 6 Hamada St.
Yokneam, 20692 Yokneam, 20692
Israel Israel
Email: talmi@marvell.com Email: talmi@marvell.com
Nurit Sprecher Nurit Sprecher
NSN Nokia Solutions and Networks
3 Hanagar St. Neve Ne'eman B 3 Hanagar St. Neve Ne'eman B
Hod Hasharon, 45241 Hod Hasharon, 45241
Israel Israel
Email: nurit.sprecher@nsn.com Email: nurit.sprecher@nsn.com
Elisa Bellagamba Elisa Bellagamba
Ericsson Ericsson
6 Farogatan St. 6 Farogatan St.
Stockholm, 164 40 Stockholm, 164 40
 End of changes. 32 change blocks. 
53 lines changed or deleted 129 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/