>> it is technically feasible that the >> existing MPLS architecture can be extended to meet the requirements >> of a Transport profile, and that the architecture allows for a single >> OAM technology for LSPs, PWs, and a deeply nested network. > > The "OAM technology" in this text refers to to way the OAM frames can be > detected in a data-stream.
During the JWT effort, I did not interpret the term "OAM technology" to be strictly limited to just the manner in which OAM frames are detected in the data-stream. I interpreted this in a broader sense. > Looking at the current discussions, there is no consensus (yet) > on whether we need a comprehensive set of OAM tools, or a very > limited set of OAM tools. I don't understand this comment. We have requirements documents that have been agreed and published, and that carefully lay out a list of capabilities that need to be available. We need tools that fulfill these requirements. Perhaps I am not sure what distinction you make between "comprehensive set of OAM tools" versus "limited set of OAM tools". Ross _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
