RFC 5950
Network Management Framework for MPLS-based Transport Networks
RFC 5950 🎀 Part 1 of 4
Bestie, this one is the Network Management Framework for MPLS-based Transport Networks 💖 It's an Informational doc, so it's published for info and isn't a Standards Track spec 🧚 It was written by S. Mansfield, Ed. and E. Gray, Ed. from Ericsson, plus K. Lam, Ed. from Alcatel-Lucent. It's dated September 2010 and has ISSN 2070-1721 🌸 The title block doesn't list anything it obsoletes or updates, so it's standing on its own ✨
Abstract ✨
This doc gives the network management framework for the Transport Profile for Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS-TP) 💅
The framework leans on ITU-T management terminology to describe a management architecture that could be used for an MPLS-TP management network 🦋
Management of an MPLS-TP network could be based on multi-tiered distributed management systems 🌈 This doc describes the network and element management architectures that could be applied, and it also covers heuristics for the fault, configuration, and performance parts of the management system 🔥
It's also a joint IETF / ITU-T effort to bring an MPLS Transport Profile into the IETF MPLS and PWE3 architectures, so a packet transport network can get its capabilities and functionalities 🫶
Status of This Memo
This doc is not an Internet Standards Track spec. It's published for info 🎀
It's a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and represents the IETF community's consensus. It got public review and was approved for publication by the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) 💜 Not every IESG-approved doc is a candidate for any level of Internet Standard, so check Section 2 of RFC 5741 if you're curious 👑
For the current status, any errata, and how to send feedback, go to http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5950 🦋
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. 💅
This doc is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) as they stand on the publication date. Please read these carefully, because they explain your rights and restrictions for this doc 🙈 Code Components pulled from this doc must include Simplified BSD License text, as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions, and they come with no warranty, as the Simplified BSD License describes 🫶
Table of Contents 🌸
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Management Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.1. Network Management Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2. Element Management Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.3. Standard Management Interfaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.4. Management- and Control-Specific Terminology . . . . . . . 11
2.5. Management Channel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3. Fault Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3.1. Supervision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3.2. Validation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3.3. Alarm Handling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4. Configuration Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.1. LSP Ownership Handover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5. Performance Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171. Introduction ✨
This doc gives the network management framework for MPLS-TP 💖 The requirements for network management in an MPLS-TP network are written up in "Network Management Requirements for MPLS-based Transport Networks" [3], and this doc explains how network elements and networks that support MPLS-TP can be managed with solutions that meet those requirements 🎀 The relationship between Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM), management, and the other framework docs is covered in the MPLS-TP framework [4] doc 🧚
It's again a joint IETF / ITU-T effort to include an MPLS Transport Profile in the IETF MPLS and PWE3 architectures, supporting the capabilities and functionalities of a packet transport network 🌈
1.1. Terminology 🦋
This framework relies on ITU-T management terminology to describe the management architecture that could be used for an MPLS-TP management network 💅 The terms below are taken from or based on definitions in ITU-T G.7710 [6], ITU-T G.7712 [7], and ITU-T M.3013 [13] 🫶
- Communication Channel (CCh): a logical channel between network elements (NEs) that can be used in (for example) management plane applications or control plane applications. For MPLS-TP, the physical channel supporting the CCh is the MPLS-TP Management Communication Channel (MCC) 🔥
- Data Communication Network (DCN): a network that supports Layer 1 (physical), Layer 2 (data-link), and Layer 3 (network) functionality for distributed management communications related to the management plane, for distributed signaling communications related to the control plane, and for other operations communications (e.g., order-wire/voice communications, software downloads, etc.). See ITU-T G.7712 [7]. 👑
- Equipment Management Function (EMF): the management functions within an NE. See ITU-T G.7710 [6]. 🌸
- Local Craft Terminal (LCT): an out-of-band device that connects to an NE for management purposes. See ITU-T G.7710 [6]. 💜
- Label Switched Path (LSP): an MPLS-TP LSP is an LSP that uses a subset of the capabilities of an MPLS LSP to meet the requirements of an MPLS transport network, as described in the MPLS-TP framework [4]. 🎀
- Management Application Function (MAF): an application process that takes part in system management. See ITU-T G.7710 [6]. 🧚
- Management Communication Channel (MCC): a CCh dedicated to management plane communications. See ITU-T G.7712 [7]. 🌈
- Message Communication Function (MCF): the communications process that handles things like information interchange and relay. See ITU-T M.3013 [13]. 🦋
- Management Communication Network (MCN): a DCN that supports management plane communication is called a Management Communication Network (MCN). See ITU-T G.7712 [7]. 💅
- MPLS-TP NE: a network element (NE) that supports MPLS-TP functions. Another term used for a network element is node. In this doc, the term node is equivalent to NE. 🫶
- MPLS-TP network: a network in which MPLS-TP NEs are deployed. 🙈
- Network Element Function (NEF): the set of functions needed to manage a network element. See ITU-T M.3010 [11]. 🔥
- Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM): for the MPLS-TP effort, OAM means the set of tools made up of "operation" activities that keep the network up and running, "administration" activities that track the resources in the network and how they're used, and "maintenance" activities that make repairs and upgrades easier. For a full expansion of the acronym, see "The OAM Acronym Soup" [15]. 👑
- Operations System (OS): a system that performs the functions that support processing of information related to operations, administration, maintenance, and provisioning (OAM&P) (see "The OAM Acronym Soup" [15]) for networks, including surveillance and testing functions that support customer access maintenance. See ITU-T M.3010 [11]. 🌸
- Signaling Communication Network (SCN): a DCN that supports control plane communication is called a Signaling Communication Network (SCN). See ITU-T G.7712 [7]. 💜
- Signaling Communication Channel (SCC): a CCh dedicated to control plane communications. The SCC may be used for GMPLS/ASON signaling and/or other control plane messages (e.g., routing messages). See ITU-T G.7712 [7]. 🎀
2. Management Architecture 🌈
The management of an MPLS-TP network could be based on multi-tiered distributed management systems, for example as described in ITU-T M.3010 [11] and ITU-T M.3060/Y.2401 [12] 💖 Each tier gives a predefined level of network management capabilities 🧚 The lowest tier of this organization model includes the MPLS-TP network element, which provides the transport service, and the Operations System (OS) at the Element Management Level 🦋 The Management Application Function (MAF) within NEs and OSs provides management support. The MAF at each entity can include agents only, managers only, or both agents and managers 💅 A MAF that includes managers is able to manage an agent included in another MAF 🫶
Management communication with peer NEs and/or OSs goes through the Message Communication Function (MCF) inside each entity (e.g., NE and OS) 🔥 A user can reach management of the MPLS-TP transport network through a Local Craft Terminal (LCT) attached to the NE, or through a Work Station (WS) attached to the OS 👑
2.1. Network Management Architecture ✨
okay so a transport Management Network (MN) can be made of several transport-technology-specific Management Networks 🧚 the way ITU-T G.7710 [6] splits things up is shown in Figure 1 below. G.7710 writes a transport-technology-specific MN as x.MN, where x is the transport technology. An MPLS-TP-specific MN is shortened to MT.MN, and once it's clear what we mean we just say "MN" for an MPLS-TP-specific one 💅 In the figure, O.MSN is the same thing as an OTN management Subnetwork.
______________________________ _________________________________
|.-------.-------.----.-------.||.--------.--------.----.--------.|
|: : : : :||: : : : :|
|:O.MSN-1:O.MSN-2: .. :O.MSN-n:||:MT.MSN-1:MT.MSN-2: .. :MT.MSN-n:|
|: : : : :||: : : : :|
'-============================-''-===============================-'
_______________________________
|.-------.-------.-----.-------.|
|: : : : :|
|:x.MSN-1:x.MSN-2: ... :x.MSN-n:|
|: : : : :|
'-=============================-'
Management Network Partitioning
Figure 1the MPLS-TP network's management can be separated from the management of the other technology-specific networks, and it runs independently of any particular client- or server-layer management plane 🦋
an MPLS-TP Management Network (MT.MN) can be split up into MPLS-TP Management SubNetworks ("MT.MSN" or "MPLS-TP MSN", or just "MSN" when it's obvious what we mean) 🎀 people do this for scalability (like geographic spread or load balancing) or for administration (like who operates it or who owns it) 🍓
the MPLS-TP MSN can hook up to the rest of the MN through one or more LCTs and/or OSs 🫶 the Message Communication Function (MCF) of an MPLS-TP NE is the part that starts, ends, routes, or otherwise handles management messages, either over CChs or through an external interface ✨
a single physical location (aka a site or office) can have lots of addressable MPLS-TP NEs in it 🌸 the NEs at different sites will normally talk to each other over CChs, and inside one site they can use an intra-site CCh or a LAN 💜
2.2. Element Management Architecture
the Equipment Management Function (EMF) of an MPLS-TP NE is the thing that lets a management system manage the NE 👑
the EMF talks to the NE's transport functions by swapping Management Information (MI) across the Management Point (MP) Reference Points 🔥 the EMF can also have a bunch of functions that reduce the data it gets across the MP Reference Points, which is a really smart move 🧠
the EMF includes stuff like Date and Time, FCAPS (Fault, Configuration, Accounting, Performance, and Security) management, and Control Plane functions 💖 it handles event message processing, data storage, and logging 📓 the management Agent is a part of the EMF that turns internal MI signals into Management Application messages and back again 🦋 when the Agent gets a Management Application message from the Message Communication Function (MCF), it does the right operations on things like the Managed Objects in a Management Information Base (MIB), whenever that's needed 💅 the MCF handles all the communication with the outside world of the NE (like the Date and Time source, the Management Plane, the Control Plane, the Local Craft Terminal, and Local Alarms) 🌈
the Date and Time functions keep track of the NE's date/time, and FCAPS management uses that to do things like timestamp event reports ⏰ literally a must-have 😭
here are some diagrams that break down the Equipment Management Function (EMF) of a Network Element (NE) 🧚 Figure 2 gives the high-level breakdown of the Network Element Function (NEF), Figure 3 zooms into the EMF, and Figure 4 shows the details of the Message Communication Function (MCF) 🎀
____________________________________________________
| Network Element Function (NEF) |
| _________________________________________ |
|| | |
|| Transport Plane Atomic Functions | |
||_________________________________________| |
| | |
| | Management |
| | Information |
| ___________________|_________________ |
| | (from date/time)<-----------+ |
| | Equipment | | |
| | Management (to/from management)<--------+ | |
| | Function | | | |
| | (EMF) (to/from control)<-----+ | | |
| | | | | | |
| | (to local alarm)---+ | | | |
| |_____________________________________| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| +--------------------------------------+ | | | |
| | +---------------------------------------+ | | |
| | | +----------------------------------------+ | |
| | | | +-----------------------------------------+ |external
| | | | | Date & Time _________________ |time
| | | | | Interface | Message | |source
| | | | +-------------- Communication <-----------------------
| | | | | Function (MCF) | |
| | | | Management | | |management
| | | +----------------> | |plane
| | | Plane Interface <---------------------->
| | | | | |local
| | | | | |craft
| | | Control Plane | | |terminal
| | +------------------> <---------------------->
| | Interface | | |control
| | | | |plane
| | Local Alarm | <---------------------->
| +--------------------> | |
| Interface | | |to local
| | | |alarms
| |_________________--------------------->
|____________________________________________________|
High-Level Decomposition of NEF
Figure 2______________________________________________________
| _______________________________________ |
| Equipment | Management Application ||
| Management | Function (MAF) ||
| Function | _________________ ||
| (EMF) || | __________________||
| ___________||_______________ | | ||
| | | | | Date & Time ||
| | Date & Time Functions | | | Interface ||<-- 1
| |____________________________| | |__________________||
| ___________||_______________ | __________________||
| | | | | ||
| | Fault Management | | | Management ||
| |____________________________| | | Plane Interface ||<-> 2
| ___________||_______________ | |__________________||
| | | | ||
| | Configuration Management | | __________________||
| |____________________________| | | ||
| ___________||_______________ | | Control ||
| | | | | Plane Interface ||<-> 3
| | Account Management | | |__________________||
| |____________________________| | ||
| ___________||_______________ | ||
| | | | ||
| | Performance Management | | ||
| |____________________________| | ||
| ___________||_______________ | ||
| | | | ||
| | Security Management | | ||
| |____________________________| | ||
| ___________||_______________ | ||
| | | | ||
| | Control Plane Function | | ||
| |____________________________| | ||
| || | __________________||
| || | | ||
| || | | Local Alarm ||
| +----->| Agent | | Interface ||--> 4
| v ||_________________| |__________________||
| .-===-. |_______________________________________||
| | MIB | |
| `-._.-' |
|______________________________________________________|
Equipment Management Function
Figure 3 _________________
| |
| Message |
| Communication |
| Function (MCF) |
| _______________ |
Date & Time || || external
1 <--------------|| Date & Time ||<--------------
Information || Communication || time source
||_______________||
| |
| _______________ |
Management || || management
Plane || Management || plane
2 <------------->|| Plane ||<------------->
Information || Communication || (e.g. - EMS,
||_______________|| peer NE)
| |
| _______________ | control
Control Plane || || plane
3 <------------->|| Control Plane ||<------------->
Information || Communication || (e.g. - EMS,
||_______________|| peer NE)
| : |
| : | local craft
| : | terminal
| : |<------------->
| _______________ |
Local Alarm || || to local
4 -------------->|| Local Alarm ||-------------->
Information || Communication || alarms...
||_______________||
|_________________|
Message Communication Function
Figure 42.3. Standard Management Interfaces ✨
Okay so, the "Network Management Requirements for MPLS-based Transport Networks" doc [3] doesn't pick a favourite management interface for MPLS-TP networks 💅 It's totally possible to set up and manage an end-to-end connection where some segments are handled by NETCONF or SNMP and others by CORBA interfaces. 🦋 Using one interface for one management job doesn't stop you from using a different one for another job, or even the same job at a different time. The protocol(s) to support are up to the operator 🫶
2.4. Management- and Control-Specific Terminology 🌸
Okay, so Data Communication Network (DCN) is the umbrella term for the network that carries Management and Signaling info between management systems and network elements, between management systems and other management systems, and between network elements and other network elements. 🌈 The Management Communications Network (MCN) is the bit of the DCN that carries Management info for the Management Plane. The Signaling Communications Network (SCN) is the bit that carries signaling info for the Control Plane. ✨
Every technology has its own words for the channels that move management and control plane info, and that's shown in the communication channel terminology picture (Figure 5) 🔥 For MPLS-TP, the management plane uses the Management Communication Channel (MCC), and the control plane uses the Signaling Communication Channel (SCC). 💜
2.5. Management Channel 🎀
The Communication Channel (CCh) is a logical channel between NEs that carries Management and/or Signaling info. ngl, some technologies give Management (MCC) and Signaling (SCC) their own separate channels, so keep that in mind 👑
MPLS-TP NEs talk to each other over the DCN. The DCN connects NEs with management systems, NEs with NEs, and management systems with management systems. 🧚
Common Terminology ____
__________ __________ | |
| | | | /->| NE | \ ____
|Management| |Operations| / |____| \ | |
|Station | <---> |System | |(CCh) | NE |
|__________| |__________| \ _|__ / |____|
\->| | /
| NE |
|____|
Network Elements use a Communication
Channel (CCh) for Transport of Information
Management Terminology ____
__________ __________ | |
| | | | /->| NE | \ ____
|Management| |Operations| / |____| \ | |
|Station | <---> |System | |(MCC) | NE |
|__________| |__________| \ _|__ / |____|
\->| | /
| NE |
|____|
Network Elements use a Management
Communication Channel (MCC) for Transport
of Management Information
Control Terminology ____
__________ __________ | |
| | | | /->| NE | \ ____
|Management| |Operations| / |____| \ | |
|Station | <---> |System | |(SCC) | NE |
|__________| |__________| \ _|__ / |____|
\->| | /
| NE |
|____|
Network Elements use a Control/Signaling
Communication Channel (SCC) for Transport
of Signaling Information
Communication Channel Terminology
Figure 53. Fault Management 🔥
Okay bestie, a fault is when a function can't do a required action 💀 That doesn't count if it's because of preventive maintenance, a lack of external resources, or planned actions. Fault management gives you the tools to detect, verify, isolate, notify, and recover from the fault. main character energy ✨
3.1. Supervision 👀
ITU-T G.7710 [6] lists five basic categories of supervision that give you what you need to detect, verify, and notify a fault 🫶 They are: Transmission Supervision, Quality of Service Supervision, Processing Supervision, Hardware Supervision, and Environment Supervision. Each category comes with a set of recommendations to make sure the fault management process gets fulfilled 🌸
3.2. Validation 💅
Per ITU-T G.7710 [6], a fault cause is a limited interruption of the required function. 🙈 It's not reasonable for every fault cause to get reported to maintenance personnel, lowkey, because that would be chaos. The validation process is what turns fault causes (events) into failures (alarms) ✨
3.3. Alarm Handling 🚨
Inside an element management system, it's important to think about mechanisms that handle severity assignment, alarm reporting control, and logging 💖
4. Configuration Management 🎀
Configuration management gives you the mechanisms to:
- provision the MPLS-TP services
- set up security for the MPLS-TP services and MPLS-TP network elements
- provide the destination for fault notifications and performance parameters
- configure and control OAM
Hardware and software provisioning and inventory reporting are also part of configuration management 🍓
4.1. LSP Ownership Handover 🦋
MPLS-TP networks can be managed by Network Management Systems (i.e., Management Plane (MP)), and also by Control Plane (CP) protocols 🌈 Using the control plane isn't a mandatory requirement (see MPLS-TP Requirements [2]), but network operators use it a lot because it makes network configuration and Label Switched Path (LSP) recovery faster and simpler ⭐
In networks where both CP and MP are provided, either one (CP or MP) can create an LSP 💜 The entity that creates an LSP owns the data plane resources that make up that LSP. Usually only the owner can modify or delete it, so the MP and CP need to interact if either one is going to manage all of the network's resources 👑
Operators might want full control of the network resources during set-up, and then let the Control Plane keep things maintained automatically 🫶 They can do that by creating LSPs through the Management Plane and then transferring LSP ownership to the Control Plane. This is called "ownership handover" RFC 5493 [10]. MP to CP ownership handover counts as a requirement where a Control Plane that supports it is in use. The converse, CP to MP ownership handover, is a feature that is recommended -- but not required -- for (G)MPLS networks, because it only has minor applications (for example, moving LSPs from one path to another as a maintenance operation) 🙈
The LSP handover procedure is already standardized for GMPLS networks, where the signaling protocol used is RSVP-TE (RFC 3209 [1]). The RSVP-TE enhancements are defined in [5] 🔥
MP and CP interworking also includes exchanging info that either the MP requests, or the CP sends as a notification because of an MP request or an automatic action (for example, a failure occurs or an operation is performed) 🌸 The CP is asked to notify the MP in a reliable manner about the status of the operations it performs. It should also provide a mechanism to monitor the status of Control Plane objects (e.g., TE Link status, available resources), and log operations related to Control Plane LSP. Logging is one of the most critical aspects, because the MP always needs an accurate history and status of each LSP and all the Data Plane resources involved in it 😭
5. Performance Management 📊
Performance statistics could overwhelm a Management Network, so it's important to have flexible instrumentation that lets you control how much performance data gets collected 💖 Ways of limiting how much info gets collected are well known and already used in IETF standards (see RFC 2819 (RMON) [8] and RFC 4502 (RMON2) [9]). The details of the performance data collected (including loss and delay measurement data) are in the "Network Management Requirements for MPLS-based Transport Networks" document [3] 🦋
There's a difference between performance data collected on-demand and data collected proactively 🧚 The definitions of on-demand and proactive measurement for OAM are in the "Network Management Requirements for MPLS-based Transport Networks" document [3] 🌈
On-demand measurement lets the operator do performance measurement for maintenance purposes, like diagnosis, or to provide detailed verification of proactive measurement ✨ It's usually used on specific LSP service instances for a limited time, which keeps its impact on network performance low during normal operations. So on-demand measurement doesn't cause scaling issues 🫶
Proactive measurement runs continuously over time after being configured with periodicity and storage info 💅 The data collected this way is usually used to verify a service's performance. Proactive performance monitoring can overwhelm both the process of collecting performance data at a network element (for some arbitrary number of service instances traversing the NE) and the process of reporting that info to the OS 😭 Because of this, operators would typically limit proactive performance measurement to a very selective subset of the services being provided, and limit reporting to statistical summaries (as opposed to raw or detailed performance statistics) 🍓
6. Acknowledgements 🫶
The authors/editors gratefully acknowledge the thoughtful review, comments and explanations provided by Diego Caviglia, Bernd Zeuner and Dan Romascanu. 💜
7. Security Considerations 🚨
The ability for the authorized network operator to access EMF interfaces (Section 2.3) when needed is critical to proper operation. Therefore, the EMF interfaces need to be protected from denial-of-service conditions or attack. The EMF interfaces that use or access private information should be protected from eavesdropping, mis-configuration, and/or mal-configuration by unauthorized network elements, systems, or users. 💀
Performance of diagnostic functions and path characterization involves extracting a significant amount of information about network construction that the network operator considers private 🙈
Section 4.3 of the "Security Framework for MPLS and GMPLS Networks" document [14] describes the attacks on the Operation and Management Plane, and also discusses the background needed to understand security practices in Internet Service Provider environments 🔥 The security practices described there apply to MPLS-TP environments 🫶
8. References 📚
8.1. Normative References
Okay so these are the bestie references the spec needs you to read, no skipping 💅
- [1] Awduche, D., Berger, L., Gan, D., Li, T., Srinivasan, V., and G. Swallow, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP Tunnels", RFC 3209, December 2001. 🎀
- [2] Niven-Jenkins, B., Brungard, D., Betts, M., Sprecher, N., and S. Ueno, "Requirements of an MPLS Transport Profile", RFC 5654, September 2009. 🦋
- [3] Lam, K., Mansfield, S., and E. Gray, "Network Management Requirements for MPLS-based Transport Networks", RFC 5951, September 2010. 🌸
- [4] Bocci, M., Bryant, S., Frost, D., Levrau, L., and L. Berger, "A Framework for MPLS in Transport Networks", RFC 5921, July 2010. ✨
- [5] Caviglia, D., Ceccarelli, D., Bramanti, D., Li, D., and S. Bardalai, "RSVP-TE Signaling Extension for LSP Handover from the Management Plane to the Control Plane in a GMPLS-Enabled Transport Network", RFC 5852, April 2010. 🧚
- [6] International Telecommunication Union, "Common equipment management function requirements", ITU-T Recommendation G.7710/ Y.1701, July 2007. 💜
- [7] International Telecommunication Union, "Architecture and specification of data communication network", ITU-T Recommendation G.7712/Y.1703, June 2008. 🌈
8.2. Informative References
These ones are the extra-credit reading, ngl they're giving context and history 🙈
- [8] Waldbusser, S., "Remote Network Monitoring Management Information Base", STD 59, RFC 2819, May 2000. 🍓
- [9] Waldbusser, S., "Remote Network Monitoring Management Information Base Version 2", RFC 4502, May 2006. 💖
- [10] Caviglia, D., Bramanti, D., Li, D., and D. McDysan, "Requirements for the Conversion between Permanent Connections and Switched Connections in a Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Network", RFC 5493, April 2009. 🫶
- [11] International Telecommunication Union, "Principles for a telecommunication management network", ITU-T Recommendation M.3010, April 2005. 🔥
- [12] International Telecommunication Union, "Principles for the Management of Next Generation Networks", ITU-T Recommendation M.3060/Y.2401, March 2006. ⭐
- [13] International Telecommunication Union, "Considerations for a telecommunication management network", ITU-T Recommendation M.3013, February 2000. 🌸
- [14] Fang, L., "Security Framework for MPLS and GMPLS Networks", RFC 5920, July 2010. 👑
- [15] Andersson, L., Helvoort, H., Bonica, R., Romascanu, D., and S. Mansfield, ""The OAM Acronym Soup"", Work in progress, June 2010. 🦋
Authors' Addresses ✨
Meet the girlies who wrote this, bestie 🎀 Here's how to reach them:
Scott Mansfield (editor)
Ericsson
300 Holger Way
San Jose, CA 95134
US
Phone: +1 724 931 9316
Email: scott.mansfield@ericsson.comEric Gray (editor)
Ericsson
900 Chelmsford Street
Lowell, MA 01851
US
Phone: +1 978 275 7470
Email: eric.gray@ericsson.comHing-Kam Lam (editor)
Alcatel-Lucent
600-700 Mountain Ave
Murray Hill, NJ 07974
US
Phone: +1 908 582 0672
Email: Kam.Lam@alcatel-lucent.comThat's the whole thing, periodt 🌈💅
📦 where this page comes from
- ietf: rfc5950 2010-09
- 💖 girlified by claude-haiku-5-5 on : a language model's rewrite of the original, under its terms