Subject: RFC 6670 on The Reasons for Selecting a Single Solution for MPLS Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM)

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 15:07:13 -0700 (PDT)

A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.

        RFC 6670

        Title:      The Reasons for Selecting a 
                    Single Solution for MPLS Transport Profile 
                    (MPLS-TP) Operations, Administration, and 
                    Maintenance (OAM) 
        Author:     N. Sprecher, KY. Hong
        Status:     Informational
        Stream:     IETF
        Date:       July 2012
        Mailbox:    [email-masked], 
                    [email-masked]
        Pages:      33
        Characters: 77266
        Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso:   None

        I-D Tag:    draft-sprecher-mpls-tp-oam-considerations-03.txt

        URL:        http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6670.txt

The MPLS Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) is a profile of the MPLS
technology for use in transport network deployments.  The work on
MPLS-TP has extended the MPLS technology with additional
architectural elements and functions that can be used in any MPLS
deployment.  MPLS-TP is a set of functions and features selected from
the extended MPLS toolset and applied in a consistent way to meet the
needs and requirements of operators of packet transport networks.

During the process of development of the profile, additions to the
MPLS toolset have been made to ensure that the tools available met
the requirements.  These additions were motivated by MPLS-TP, but
form part of the wider MPLS toolset such that any of them could be
used in any MPLS deployment.

One major set of additions provides enhanced support for Operations,
Administration, and Maintenance (OAM).  This enables fault management
and performance monitoring to the level needed in a transport
network.  Many solutions and protocol extensions have been proposed
to address the requirements for MPLS-TP OAM, and this document sets
out the reasons for selecting a single, coherent set of solutions for
standardization.  This document is not an Internet Standards Track 
specification; it is published for informational purposes.

INFORMATIONAL: This memo provides information for the Internet community.
It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of
this memo is unlimited.

This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, see
  http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
  http://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist

For searching the RFC series, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfcsearch.html.
For downloading RFCs, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html.

Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
author of the RFC in question, or to [email-masked].  Unless
specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
unlimited distribution.

The RFC Editor Team
Association Management Solutions, LLC