50 likes | 171 Views
Communication of Alarm Information draft-berger-ccamp-gmpls-alarm-spec-00.txt. L. Berger (Movaz), D. Brungard (ATT), I. Bryskin (Movaz), A. Farrel (Old Dog Consulting), D. Papadimitriou (Alcatel), A. Satyanarayana (Movaz). The Not-A-Tutorial Slide. Please note:
E N D
Communication of Alarm Informationdraft-berger-ccamp-gmpls-alarm-spec-00.txt L. Berger (Movaz), D. Brungard (ATT), I. Bryskin (Movaz), A. Farrel (Old Dog Consulting), D. Papadimitriou (Alcatel), A. Satyanarayana (Movaz) CCAMP - 58th IETF
The Not-A-Tutorial Slide • Please note: • The function described does not replace or modify any existing management plane functions • Provides alarm information along full LSP Node 172.16.25.6, IP Interface 1.1.3.2 Severity: Major, Condition: DATALOL Time: NOV 01 21:11:09 2003 Node 172.16.25.12, IP Interface 1.1.2.1 Severity: Critical, Condition: LOS Time: NOV 01 20:52:15 2003 CCAMP - 58th IETF
Open Issues • Non-Issues • Enabling/disabling alarm information communication • Uses new Admin_Status Bit • Communication of alarm information • Uses new Alarm_Spec object with same format as Error_Spec, plus new TLVs • Not modifying LSP state • Alarm_Spec sent in path and Resv messages • Compatibility • Two Open Issues • Use of new TLVs in Error_Spec • Error codes for well known and standard Alarms CCAMP - 58th IETF
Issues (continued) • Should the use of new the TLVs in Error_Spec be allowed? • Four new TLVs • Reference_count • Severity • Timestamp • Error_string • Code points for well known and standard Alarms • To be carried in Error Values using new Error Codes • Identified ITU and Telecordia specs use strings not values • Options: • Define string to value mappings for some/every spec • Punt, i.e., stay with using strings CCAMP - 58th IETF
Next Steps • Resolve open issues • Progress the draft • Does this fit into the charter? • WG document? CCAMP - 58th IETF