Subject: [mpls] Why draft-turaga-mpls-test-labels-00 ?

From: Shahram Davari <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2016 08:18:02 -0700

Hi,

I just want to repeat my comments in today’s meeting. There are existing
solutions to the problem stated in this draft.

Specifically one can use RFC6374 (MPLS LM) using Section OAM . The MPLS LM
uses HW counters and the MPLS LM packets are sent

Very infrequently by CPU (every minute or more). Any degradation of the
connection between two adjacent routers can  be easily detected,

With infrequent CPU processing time.

So I don’t support this  draft and think we should not invent new solutions
when reasonable existing solutions exist.

Thx

Shahram