Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-malis-pwe3-cell-transport-00.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 07:39:56 -0400

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.

	Title		: PWE3 ATM Transparent Cell Transport Service
	Author(s)	: A. Malis et al.
	Filename	: draft-malis-pwe3-cell-transport-00.txt
	Pages		: 3
	Date		: 2002-10-21
	
The document describes a transparent cell transport service that
makes use of the 'N-to-one' cell relay mode for PWE3 ATM cell
encapsulation described in [ATM-ENCAPS].

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-malis-pwe3-cell-transport-00.txt

To remove yourself from the IETF Announcement list, send a message to 
ietf-announce-request with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username
"anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in,
type "cd internet-drafts" and then
	"get draft-malis-pwe3-cell-transport-00.txt".

A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html 
or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt

Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail.

Send a message to:
	[email-masked].
In the body type:
	"FILE /internet-drafts/draft-malis-pwe3-cell-transport-00.txt".
	
NOTE:	The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in
	MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility.  To use this
	feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE"
	command.  To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or
	a MIME-compliant mail reader.  Different MIME-compliant mail readers
	exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with
	"multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split
	up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on
	how to manipulate these messages.

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.

---

From: Shahram Davari <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 06:47:54 -0700

Hi,

The OAM implications of this mode is completely different from N:1 cell mode.
For example you can't generate AIS on either PE side. You can't also do a
CE-PE ATM connectivity test. So simply referring to [ATM-ENCAPS] draft 
(which BTW should be changed to reference 3) is not adequate to describe this mode. 

A solution for CE-PE connectivity test in ATM layer and downstream alarm suppression
is needed. 

Thanks,
-Shahram

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 7:40 AM
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: [PWE3] I-D ACTION:draft-malis-pwe3-cell-transport-00.txt
> 
> 

Send a message to:
	[email-masked].
In the body type:

---

From: "Andrew G. Malis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 12:26:26 -0400

Shahram,

The point of this draft is that the transparent cell transport appendix 
(aka port mode) is being removed from the combined ATM encapsulation draft, 
so this is to capture that text in a separate draft, which is especially 
important since there are multiple interoperating implementations.

We've previously discussed the OAM implications at length, which resulted 
in text that was also in the Martini ATM encapsulation appendix.  However, 
Neil sent an email over the summer saying that he was still unhappy with 
that OAM text, so for now there really isn't any consensus OAM text to include.

If you're willing to propose some text, I'll be happy to include it once we 
get consensus on the list.

Thanks,
Andy

---------

At 10/22/2002 06:47 AM -0700, Shahram Davari wrote:
>_______________________________________________
>pwe3 mailing list
>[email-masked]
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3

---

From: Shahram Davari <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 09:43:58 -0700

Andy,

1) Where is the ID that you refer to: draft-ietf-pwe3-atm-encap-00.txt?
2) Do you want to move the port mode to your draft? or another draft?
   if you want to move it to your draft, why don't you put the whole
   text for port mode in your draft? 

Yours,
-Shahram

> From: Andrew G. Malis [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 12:26 PM
> To: Shahram Davari
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: RE: [PWE3] I-D ACTION:draft-malis-pwe3-cell-transport-00.txt
> 
> 
> Shahram,
> 
> >(which BTW should be changed to reference 3) is not adequate 
> to describe 
> >this mode.
> >
> >A solution for CE-PE connectivity test in ATM layer and 
> downstream alarm 
> >suppression
> >is needed.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >-Shahram
> >
> >
> >         "FILE 
> /internet-drafts/draft-malis-pwe3-cell-transport-00.txt".
> >

---

From: "Andrew G. Malis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 13:12:18 -0400

Shahram,

1. Luca and others are working on it now.  They expect to get it uploaded 
in time for the draft cutoff.  It will reflect the SG13 and PWE3 compromise 
on ATM encapsulation that was discussed at the Yokohama meeting.

2. This IS the whole text for "port mode" - appendix A from 
draft-martini-atm-encap-mpls-01.txt.  I didn't inlcude the "defect 
handling" section because,as I said earlier, there hasn't been any 
consensus (especially among the implementers :-) on it.

Cheers,
Andy

--------

---

From: Shahram Davari <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 12:27:18 -0700

Andy,

Thanks for your explanation. I think the most important and possibly difficult part of any 
carrier class technology is its management and defect handling.  Are you proposing to
advance this draft to propose standard without descend defect handling? or are
you proposing the start of a discussion on defect handling for port mode, until
a consensus is formed before advancing it to proposed standard?

Thanks,
-Shahram

> Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 1:12 PM
> To: Shahram Davari
> Cc: 'Andrew G. Malis'; [email-masked]
> > > Subject: RE: [PWE3] I-D 
> ACTION:draft-malis-pwe3-cell-transport-00.txt
> > >
> > >
> > > Shahram,
> > >

---

From: "Andrew G. Malis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 16:02:55 -0400

Shahram,

At the moment I'm proposing the text as it is now, probably as an 
informational RFC rather than PS (since it's just documenting a specific 
use that's being made of the N-to-1 encapsulation).  However, if the WG 
wants to go for PS and/or add defect handling text, that's fine with 
me.  As I said earlier, if you're willing to propose some text, I'll be 
happy to include it once we get consensus on the list.

Cheers,
Andy

--------

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 16:20:37 +0100

Andy/Shahram,

Been a bit busy to check mail much recently....however, on the specific
issue of port mode:

The key thing to remember when dealing with any connection-oriented pkt-sw
network (and this includes p2p LSPs) is that we cannot simply consider the
behaviour of the pkts independently of their parent trail.....both have to
be considered together.  Further, it is the defect management of the trail
that should be our primary concern.  However, since we don't know the
VPC/VCC profile in 'port mode' (ie the specific ATM trails supported) then
we cannot directly apply the required FDI/AIS signal to the affected trails
to suppress their alarms.  The last time I discussed this with John
Rutemiller, John suggested that perhaps the cleanest architectural kludge
would be to force a loss of cell delineation across the whole cell-stream.
A downstreamn device that does know the client VPC/VCC profile supported
would then inject the required FDI/AIS signal into the affected ATM trails. 

John, if you are reading this perhaps you may like to add any further
observations as its while since we last discussed this.

regards, Neil

> From: Shahram Davari [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: 22 October 2002 20:27
> To: 'Andrew G. Malis'
> Cc: [email-masked]

---

From: "Proch, Daniel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 12:05:45 -0400

Neil, Andy,

John and I put together some text with suggested modes to provide OAM for
port mode.  As you note, one suggestion was Defect Indication using Loss of
Cell Delineation (LCD).  Another was using Physical Layer OAM cells to
provide an additional F3 transmission path layer above the F3 transmission
path layer provided by SONET/SDH, or PDH interfaces.  This text is included
in an MPLSForum doc regarding ATM port mode, but not in
draft-malis-pwe3-cell-transport-00.txt.

dan

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 11:21 AM
To: [email-masked]; [email-masked];
[email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [PWE3] I-D ACTION:draft-malis-pwe3-cell-transport-00.txt

Andy/Shahram,

regards, Neil