The IESG has approved the following document: - 'Requirements for hitless MPLS path segment monitoring' (draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-14.txt) as Informational RFC This document is the product of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group. The IESG contact persons are Alvaro Retana, Alia Atlas and Deborah Brungard. A URL of this Internet Draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm/ Technical Summary One of the most important OAM capabilities for transport network operation is fault localisation. An in-service, on-demand segment monitoring function of a transport path is indispensable, particularly when the service monitoring function is activated only between end points. However, the current segment monitoring approach defined for MPLS (including the transport profile (MPLS-TP)) in RFC 6371 "Operations, Administration, and Maintenance Framework for MPLS- Based Transport Networks" has drawbacks. This document provides an analysis of the existing MPLS-TP OAM mechanisms for the path segment monitoring and provides requirements to guide the development of new OAM tools to support a Hitless Path Segment Monitoring (HPSM). Working Group Summary WG progress was smooth with no controversy. Document Quality The document has been well reviewed by members of the WG with interest in MPLS-TP, and liaisoned with ITU-T SG15, and updated accordingly. As a requirements document it does not specify any protocol to be implemented, but rather specifies requirements which will be used to guide future work. As the document has been a WG document since 2012, without any solution documents submitted, the responsible AD questioned the interest for publishing the requirements document as a stand-alone document and advised to delay until solution work was proposed and possibly combining. After several months, the WG and WG Chairs requested again to proceed with publishing as a standalone document. Personnel Who is the Document Shepherd for this document? David Sinicrope Who is the Responsible Area Director? Deborah Brungard RFC Editor Note Section 4.8: Anyway maintenance points/s/Though maintenance points Investigating potential solutions for satisfying proposed HPSM requirements might lead to propose new functional components that have to be backward compatible with MPLS architecture. /s/ Investigating potential solutions for satisfying HPSM requirements may lead to identifying new functional components; these components need to be backward compatible with MPLS architecture. Section 4.9: That because these functions/s/These functions
