Subject: RE: draft-nadeau-pwe3-oam-msg-map-03.txt

From: "Yaakov Stein" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 09:13:00 +0200

Stewart, 

> Is there PWE3 WG consensus to make:
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-nadeau-pwe3-oam-msg-map-03.txt
> 
> a WG draft?

Regarding the "like to like" case, although I am certainly in favor
of rationalizing the OAM treatment for the different PW types, 
I defer to the OAM experts regarding the details.

I do have serious problems with the "service interworking" cases
discussed in this draft.

First, I believe they are beyond the scope of our original charter
(at least as it presently stands).

Second, since we have never defined payload encapsulations 
for the service interworking cases, I believe it is premature to
attempt to solve the OAM problems.

Finally, I find the discussion in the introduction to be quite confusing.
The user data for the ATM to FR over MPLS case is presented as either
being carried by ATM/FR or FR/ATM service interworking before the 
MPLS edge, and then using an FR or ATM PW respectively. 
Why then do we need figure 5? 
If, from the point of view of the MPLS network, 
we are simply carrying either an ATM or FR PW, 
then the whole issue has been reduced to cases we know how to treat.

Y(J)S