Dale There was a draft on OAM requirements in the working group a few years ago, but this somewhat fell by the wayside.
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ashwood-nvo3-operational-requirement-03.txt It may be a good time for an interested participant to pick this up again. Matthew On 06/04/2018, 02:58, "nvo3 on behalf of Dale R. Worley" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: My apologies, but I'm new here. There has been various discussion about OAM packets, but what I've seen has been fairly vague -- the O bit in Geneve and a proposal for an OAM encapsulation that was not detailed about what application-level information the encapsulation would carry. Is there solid information about what OAM is to achieve and what is necessary to achieve it? Or is that a discussion that we really need to have? I can see various different ways of opening up the subject. One is to show clearly useful implementations, and from that, start to abstract the functions that they perform. Conversely, we can show functions for which there is a need, and start to work out implementations. Dale _______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3 _______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
