idnits 2.17.00 (12 Aug 2021) /tmp/idnits48798/draft-ietf-pwe3-vccv-impl-survey-results-00.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (April 17, 2012) is 3686 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Informational ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 1 warning (==), 1 comment (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group N. Del Regno, Ed. 3 Internet-Draft Verizon Communications Inc 4 Intended status: Informational April 17, 2012 5 Expires: October 19, 2012 7 The Pseudowire (PW) & Virtual Circuit Connectivity Verification (VCCV) 8 Implementation Survey Results 9 draft-ietf-pwe3-vccv-impl-survey-results-00 11 Abstract 13 Most Pseudowire Emulation Edge-to-Edge (PWE3) encapsulations mandate 14 the use of the Control Word (CW) in order to better emulate the 15 services for which the encapsulations have been defined. However, 16 some encapulations treat the Control Word as optional. As a result, 17 implementations of the CW, for encapsulations for which it is 18 optional, vary by equipment manufacturer, equipment model and service 19 provider network. Similarly, Virtual Circuit Connectivity 20 Verification (VCCV) supports three Control Channel (CC) types and 21 multiple Connectivity Verification (CV) Types. This flexibility has 22 led to reports of interoperability issues within deployed networks 23 and associated drafts to attempt to remedy the situation. This 24 survey of the PW/VCCV user community was conducted to determine 25 implementation trends. The survey and results is presented herein. 27 Status of this Memo 29 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 30 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 32 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 33 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 34 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 35 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 37 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 38 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 39 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 40 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 42 This Internet-Draft will expire on October 19, 2012. 44 Copyright Notice 46 Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 47 document authors. All rights reserved. 49 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 50 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 51 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 52 publication of this document. Please review these documents 53 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 54 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 55 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 56 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 57 described in the Simplified BSD License. 59 Table of Contents 61 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 62 1.1. PW/VCCV Survey Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 63 1.2. PW/VCCV Survey Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 64 1.3. PW/VCCV Survey Highlights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 65 2. Survey Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 66 2.1. Respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 67 2.2. Pseudowire Encapsulations Implemented . . . . . . . . . . 8 68 2.3. Number of Pseudowires Deployed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 69 2.4. VCCV Control Channel In Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 70 2.5. VCCV Connectivity Verification Types In Use . . . . . . . 12 71 2.6. Control Word Support for Encaps for which CW is 72 Optional . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 73 2.7. Open Ended Question . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 74 3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 75 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 76 5. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 77 6. Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 78 6.1. Respondent 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 79 6.2. Respondent 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 80 6.3. Respondent 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 81 6.4. Respondent 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 82 6.5. Respondent 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 83 6.6. Respondent 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 84 6.7. Respondent 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 85 6.8. Respondent 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 86 6.9. Respondent 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 87 6.10. Respondent 10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 88 6.11. Respondent 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 89 6.12. Respondent 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 90 6.13. Respondent 13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 91 6.14. Respondent 14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 92 6.15. Respondent 15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 93 6.16. Respondent 16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 94 6.17. Respondent 17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 95 7. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 96 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 98 1. Introduction 100 The IETF has defined many encapsulations of various layer 1 and layer 101 2 service-specific PDUs and circuit data. Within these 102 encapsulations, there are often several modes of encapsulation which 103 have differing requirements in order to fully emulate the service. 104 As such, the use of the PWE3 Control Word is mandated in many of the 105 encapsulations, but not all. This can present interoperability 106 issues related to A) Control Word use and B) VCCV Control Channel 107 negotiation in mixed implementation environments. 109 The encapsulations and modes for which the Control Word is currently 110 optional are: 112 o Ethernet Tagged Mode 114 o Ethernet Raw Mode 116 o PPP 118 o HDLC 120 o Frame Relay Port Mode 122 o ATM (N:1 Cell Mode) 124 [RFC5085] defines three Control Channel types for MPLS PW's: Type 1, 125 using the Pseudowire Control Word, Type 2, using the Router Alert 126 Label, and Type 3, using TTL Expiration (e.g. MPLS PW Label with TTL 127 == 1). While Type 2 (RA Label) is indicated as being "the preferred 128 mode of VCCV operation when the Control Word is not present," RFC 129 5085 does not indicate a mandatory Control Channel to ensure 130 interoperable implementations. The closest it comes to mandating a 131 control channel is the requirement to support Type 1 (Control Word) 132 whenever the control word is present. As such, the three options 133 yield seven implementation permutations (assuming you have to support 134 at least one Control Channel type to provide VCCV). Due to these 135 permuations, interoperability challenges have been identified by 136 several VCCV users. 138 In order to assess the best approach to address the observed 139 interoperability issues, the PWE3 working group decided to solicit 140 feedback from the PW and VCCV user community regarding 141 implementation. This document presents the survey and the 142 information returned by the user community who participated. 144 1.1. PW/VCCV Survey Overview 146 Per the direction of the PWE3 Working Group chairs, a survey was 147 created to sample the nature of implementations of Pseudowires, with 148 specific emphasis on Control Word usage, and VCCV, with emphasis on 149 Control Channel and Control Type usage. The survey consisted of a 150 series of questions based on direction of the WG chairs and the 151 survey opened to the public on November 4, 2010. The URL for the 152 survey (now closed) was http://www.surveymonkey.com/pwe3/. The 153 survey ran from November 4, 2010 until February 25, 2011. 155 1.2. PW/VCCV Survey Form 157 The PW/VCCV Implementation Survey requested the following information 158 about user implementations: 160 - Responding Organziation. No provisions were made for anonymity. 161 All responses required a valid email address in order to validate the 162 survey response. 164 - Of the various encapsulations (and options therein) known at the 165 time, including the WG draft for Fiber Channel), which were 166 implemented b the respondent. These included: 168 o Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 170 o Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 172 o SAToP - RFC 4553 174 o PPP - RFC 4618 176 o HDLC - RFC 4618 178 o Frame Relay (Port Mode) - RFC 4619 180 o Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 182 o ATM (N:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 184 o ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 186 o ATM (AAL5 SDU Mode) - RFC 4717 188 o ATM (AAL5 PDU Mode) - RFC 4717 190 o CEP - RFC 4842 191 o CESoPSN - RFC 5086 193 o TDMoIP - RFC 5087 195 o Fiber Channel (Port Mode) - draft-ietf-pwe3-fc-encap 197 - Approximately how many Pseudowires of each type were deployed. 198 Respondents could list a number, or for the sake of privacy, could 199 just respond "In-Use" instead. 201 - For each encapsulation listed above, the respondent could indicated 202 which Control Channel was in use. The options listed were: 204 o Control Word (Type 1) 206 o Router Alert Label (Type 2) 208 o TTL Expiry (Type 3) 210 - For each encapsulation listed above, the respondent could indicate 211 which Connectivity Verification types were in use. The options were: 213 o ICMP Ping 215 o LSP Ping 217 - For each encapsulation type for which the use of the Control Word 218 is optional, the respondents could indicated the encaps for which 219 Control Word was supported by the equipment used and whether it was 220 in use in the network. The encaps listed were: 222 o Ethernet (Tagged Mode) 224 o Ethernet (Raw Mode) 226 o PPP 228 o HDLC 230 o Frame Relay (Port Mode) 232 o ATM (N:1 Cell Mode) 234 - Finally, a freeform entry was provided for the respondent to 235 provide feedback regarding PW and VCCV deployments, VCCV 236 interoperability challenges, the survey or any network/vendor details 237 they wished to share. 239 1.3. PW/VCCV Survey Highlights 241 There were 17 valid responses to the survey. The responding 242 companies are listed below in Section 2.1. 244 2. Survey Results 246 2.1. Respondents 248 The following companies participated in the PW/VCCV Implementation 249 Survey. The data provided has been aggregated. No specific 250 company's reponse will be detailed herein. 252 o Time Warner Cable 254 o Bright House Networks 256 o Tinet 258 o AboveNet 260 o Telecom New Zealand 262 o Cox Communications 264 o MTN South Africa 266 o Wipro Technologies 268 o Verizon 270 o AMS-IX 272 o Superonline 274 o Deutsche Telekom AG 276 o Internet Solution 278 o Easynet Global Services 280 o Telstra Corporation 282 o OJSC MegaFon 284 o France Telecom Orange 286 2.2. Pseudowire Encapsulations Implemented 288 The following question was asked: "In your network in general, across 289 all products, please indicate which Pseudowire encapsulations your 290 company has implemented." Of all responses, the following list shows 291 the percentage of responses for each encapsulation: 293 o Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 = 76.5% 295 o Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 = 82.4% 297 o SAToP - RFC 4553 = 11.8% 299 o PPP - RFC 4618 = 11.8% 301 o HDLC - RFC 4618 = 5.9% 303 o Frame Relay (Port Mode) - RFC 4619 = 17.6% 305 o Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 = 41.2% 307 o ATM (N:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 = 5.9% 309 o ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 = 17.6% 311 o ATM (AAL5 SDU Mode) - RFC 4717 = 5.9% 313 o ATM (AAL5 PDU Mode) - RFC 4717 = 0.0% 315 o CEP - RFC 4842 = 0.0% 317 o CESoPSN - RFC 5086 = 11.8% 319 o TDMoIP - RFC 5087 = 11.8% 321 o Fiber Channel (Port Mode) - draft-ietf-pwe3-fc-encap = 5.9% 323 2.3. Number of Pseudowires Deployed 325 The following question was asked: "Approximately how many Pseudowires 326 are deployed of each encapsulation type. Note, this should be the 327 number of pseudowires in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned 328 to do so." The following list shows the number of psudowires in use 329 for each encapsulation: 331 o Ethernet Tagged Mode = 93,861 332 o Ethernet Raw Mode = 94,231 334 o SAToP - RFC 4553 = 20,050 336 o PPP - RFC 4618 = 500 338 o HDLC - RFC 4618 = 0 340 o Frame Relay (Port Mode) - RFC 4619 = 5,002 342 o Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 = 50,959 344 o ATM (N:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 = 50,000 346 o ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 = 70,103 348 o ATM (AAL5 SDU Mode) - RFC 4717 = 0 350 o ATM (AAL5 PDU Mode) - RFC 4717 = 0 352 o CEP - RFC 4842 = 0 354 o CESoPSN - RFC 5086 = 21,600 356 o TDMoIP - RFC 5087 = 20,000 358 o Fiber Channel (Port Mode) - draft-ietf-pwe3-fc-encap = 0 360 In the above responses, on several occasions the response was in the 361 form of "> XXXXX" where the response indicated a number greater than 362 the one provided. Where applicable, the number itself was used in 363 the sums above. For example, ">20K" and "20K+" yielded 20K. 365 Additionally, the following encaps were listed as "In-Use" with no 366 quantity provided: 368 o Ethernet Raw Mode: 2 Responses 370 o ATM (AAL5 SDU Mode): 1 Response 372 o TDMoIP: 1 Response 374 2.4. VCCV Control Channel In Use 376 The following instructions were given: "Please indicate which VCCV 377 Control Channel is used for each encapsulation type. Understanding 378 that users may have different networks with varying implementations, 379 for your network in general, please select all which apply." The 380 numbers below indicate the number of responses. The responses were: 382 o Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 384 * Control Word (Type 1) = 7 386 * Router Alert Label (Type 2) = 3 388 * TTL Expiry (Type 3) = 3 390 o Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 392 * Control Word (Type 1) = 8 394 * Router Alert Label (Type 2) = 4 396 * TTL Expiry (Type 3) = 4 398 o SAToP - RFC 4553 400 * Control Word (Type 1) = 1 402 * Router Alert Label (Type 2) = 0 404 * TTL Expiry (Type 3) = 0 406 o PPP - RFC 4618 408 * Control Word (Type 1) = 0 410 * Router Alert Label (Type 2) = 0 412 * TTL Expiry (Type 3) = 0 414 o HDLC - RFC 4618 416 * Control Word (Type 1) = 0 418 * Router Alert Label (Type 2) = 0 420 * TTL Expiry (Type 3) = 0 422 o Frame Relay (Port Mode) - RFC 4619 424 * Control Word (Type 1) = 1 426 * Router Alert Label (Type 2) = 0 427 * TTL Expiry (Type 3) = 0 429 o Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 431 * Control Word (Type 1) = 3 433 * Router Alert Label (Type 2) = 0 435 * TTL Expiry (Type 3) = 2 437 o ATM (N:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 439 * Control Word (Type 1) = 1 441 * Router Alert Label (Type 2) = 0 443 * TTL Expiry (Type 3) = 0 445 o ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 447 * Control Word (Type 1) = 1 449 * Router Alert Label (Type 2) = 0 451 * TTL Expiry (Type 3) = 1 453 o ATM (AAL5 SDU Mode) - RFC 4717 455 * Control Word (Type 1) = 0 457 * Router Alert Label (Type 2) = 1 459 * TTL Expiry (Type 3) = 0 461 o ATM (AAL5 PDU Mode) - RFC 4717 463 * Control Word (Type 1) = 0 465 * Router Alert Label (Type 2) = 0 467 * TTL Expiry (Type 3) = 0 469 o CEP - RFC 4842 471 * Control Word (Type 1) = 0 473 * Router Alert Label (Type 2) = 0 474 * TTL Expiry (Type 3) = 0 476 o CESoPSN - RFC 5086 478 * Control Word (Type 1) = 0 480 * Router Alert Label (Type 2) = 0 482 * TTL Expiry (Type 3) = 1 484 o TDMoIP - RFC 5087 486 * Control Word (Type 1) = 0 488 * Router Alert Label (Type 2) = 0 490 * TTL Expiry (Type 3) = 0 492 o Fiber Channel (Port Mode) - draft-ietf-pwe3-fc-encap 494 * Control Word (Type 1) = 0 496 * Router Alert Label (Type 2) = 0 498 * TTL Expiry (Type 3) = 0 500 2.5. VCCV Connectivity Verification Types In Use 502 The following instructions were given: "Please indicate which VCCV 503 Connectivity Verification types are used in your networks for each 504 encapsulation type." Note that BFD was not one of the choices. The 505 responses were as follows: 507 o Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 509 * ICMP Ping = 5 511 * LSP Ping = 11 513 o Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 515 * ICMP Ping = 6 517 * LSP Ping = 11 519 o SAToP - RFC 4553 520 * ICMP Ping = 0 522 * LSP Ping = 2 524 o PPP - RFC 4618 526 * ICMP Ping = 0 528 * LSP Ping = 0 530 o HDLC - RFC 4618 532 * ICMP Ping = 0 534 * LSP Ping = 0 536 o Frame Relay (Port Mode) - RFC 4619 538 * ICMP Ping = 0 540 * LSP Ping = 1 542 o Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 544 * ICMP Ping = 2 546 * LSP Ping = 5 548 o ATM (N:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 550 * ICMP Ping = 0 552 * LSP Ping = 1 554 o ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 556 * ICMP Ping = 0 558 * LSP Ping = 3 560 o ATM (AAL5 SDU Mode) - RFC 4717 562 * ICMP Ping = 0 564 * LSP Ping = 1 566 o ATM (AAL5 PDU Mode) - RFC 4717 568 * ICMP Ping = 0 570 * LSP Ping = 0 572 o CEP - RFC 4842 574 * ICMP Ping = 0 576 * LSP Ping = 0 578 o CESoPSN - RFC 5086 580 * ICMP Ping = 0 582 * LSP Ping = 1 584 o TDMoIP - RFC 5087 586 * ICMP Ping = 0 588 * LSP Ping = 1 590 o Fiber Channel (Port Mode) - draft-ietf-pwe3-fc-encap 592 * ICMP Ping = 0 594 * LSP Ping = 0 596 2.6. Control Word Support for Encaps for which CW is Optional 598 The following instructions were given: "Please indicate your 599 network's support of and use of the Control Word for encapsulations 600 for which the Control Word is optional." The responses were: 602 o Ethernet (Tagged Mode) 604 * Supported by Network/Equipment = 13 606 * Used in Network = 6 608 o Ethernet (Raw Mode) 610 * Supported by Network/Equipment = 14 612 * Used in Network = 7 614 o PPP 616 * Supported by Network/Equipment = 5 618 * Used in Network = 0 620 o HDLC 622 * Supported by Network/Equipment = 4 624 * Used in Network = 0 626 o Frame Relay (Port Mode) 628 * Supported by Network/Equipment = 3 630 * Used in Network = 1 632 o ATM (N:1 Cell Mode) 634 * Supported by Network/Equipment = 5 636 * Used in Network = 1 638 2.7. Open Ended Question 640 Space was provided for user feedback. The following instructions 641 were given: "Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding 642 PW and VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this 643 survey or any network/vendor details you wish to share." Below are 644 the responses, made anonymous. 646 1. BFD VCCV Control Channel is not indicated in the survey (may be 647 required for PW redundancy purpose) 649 2. Using CV is not required at the moment 651 3. COMPANY has deployed several MPLS network elements, from multiple 652 vendors. COMPANY is seeking a uniform implementation of VCCV 653 Control Channel (CC) capabilities across its various vendor 654 platforms. This will provide COMPANY with significant advantages 655 in reduced operational overheads when handling cross-domain 656 faults. Having a uniform VCCV feature implementation in COMPANY 657 multi-vendor network leads to: o Reduced operational cost and 658 complexity o Reduced OSS development to coordinate incompatible 659 VCCV implementations. o Increased end-end service availability 660 when handing faults. In addition, currently some of COMPANY 661 deployed VCCV traffic flows (on some vendor platforms) are not 662 guaranteed to follow those of the customer's application traffic 663 (a key operational requirement). As a result, the response from 664 the circuit ping cannot faithfully reflect the status of the 665 circuit. This leads to ambiguity regarding the operational 666 status of our networks. An in-band method is highly preferred, 667 with COMPANY having a clear preference for VCCV Circuit Ping 668 using PWE Control Word. This preference is being pursued with 669 each of COMPANY vendors. 671 4. PW VCCV is very useful tool for finding faults in each PW 672 channel. Without this we can not find fault on a PW channel. PW 673 VCCV using BFD is another better option. Introperbility 674 challences are with Ethernet OAM mechanism. 676 5. We are using L2PVPN AToM like-to-like models - ATMoMPLS - EoMPLS 677 ATMoMPLS : This service offered for transporting ATM cells over 678 IP/MPLS core with Edge ATM CE devices including BPX, Ericsson 679 Media Gateway etc. This is purely a Port mode with cell-packing 680 configuration on it to have best performance. QoS marking is 681 done for getting LLQ treatment in the core for these MPLS 682 encapsulated ATM packets. EoMPLS: This service offered for 683 transporting 2G/3G traffic from network such as Node-B to RNC's 684 over IP/MPLS backbone core network. QoS marking is done for 685 getting guaranteed bandwidth treatment in the core for these MPLS 686 encapsulated ATM packets. In addition to basic L2VPN service 687 configuration, these traffic are routed via MPLS TE tunnels with 688 dedicated path and bandwidth defined to avoid bandwidth related 689 congestion. 691 6. EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURER does not provide options to configure VCCV 692 control-channel and its sub options for LDP based L2Circuits. 693 How can we achieve end-to-end management and fault detection of 694 PW without VCCV in such cases? 696 7. I'm very interested in this work as we continue to experience 697 interop challenges particularly with newer vendors to the space 698 who are only implementing VCCV via control word. Vendors who 699 have tailed their MPLS OAM set specifically to the cell backhaul 700 space and mandatory CW have been known to fall into this space. 701 That's all I've got. 703 3. Security Considerations 705 As this document is a report of the PW/VCCV User Implementation 706 Survey results, no security considerations are introduced. 708 4. IANA Considerations 710 This document has no actions for IANA. 712 5. Acknowledgements 714 We would like to thank the chairs of the PWE3 Working Group for their 715 guidance and review of the Survey questions. We would also like to 716 sincerely thank those listed in Section 2.1. who took the time and 717 effort to participate. 719 6. Appendix 721 The detailed reponses are included in this appendix. The respondent 722 contact info has been removed. 724 6.1. Respondent 1 726 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 727 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 729 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 731 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 732 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 733 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 734 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 735 but cannot provide a number. 737 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 - 423 739 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 740 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 741 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 742 please select all which apply. 744 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: Control Word (Type 1) 746 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 747 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 749 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: LSP Ping 751 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 752 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 754 Supported by Network/Equipment: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw 755 Mode) 757 Used in Network: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw Mode) 759 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 760 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 761 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 763 No Response 765 6.2. Respondent 2 767 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 768 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 770 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 772 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 774 SAToP - RFC 4553 776 CESoPSN - RFC 5086 778 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 779 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 780 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 781 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 782 but cannot provide a number. 784 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 - 5000 786 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 - 1000 788 SAToP - RFC 4553 - 50 790 CESoPSN - RFC 5086 - 1600 792 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 793 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 794 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 795 please select all which apply. 797 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: Control Word (Type 1), Router Alert 798 Label (Type 2), TTL Expiry (Type 3) 800 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: Control Word (Type 1), Router Alert 801 Label (Type 2), TTL Expiry (Type 3) 802 CESoPSN - RFC 5086: TTL Expiry (Type 3) 804 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 805 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 807 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: ICMP Ping, LSP Ping 809 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: ICMP Ping, LSP Ping 811 SAToP - RFC 4553: LSP Ping 813 CESoPSN - RFC 5086: LSP Ping 815 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 816 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 818 Supported by Network/Equipment: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw 819 Mode) 821 Used in Network: No Response 823 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 824 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 825 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 827 I'm very interested in this work as we continue to experience interop 828 challenges particularly with newer vendors to the space who are only 829 implementing VCCV via control word. Vendors who have tailed their 830 MPLS OAM set specifically to the cell backhaul space and mandatory CW 831 have been known to fall into this space. That's all I've got. 833 6.3. Respondent 3 835 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 836 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 838 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 840 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 842 Frame Relay (Port Mode) - RFC 4619 844 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 846 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 847 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 848 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 849 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 850 but cannot provide a number. 852 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 - 800 854 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 - 50 856 Frame Relay (Port Mode) - RFC 4619 - 2 858 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 - 2 860 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 861 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 862 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 863 please select all which apply. 865 No Response 867 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 868 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 870 No Response 872 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 873 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 875 Supported by Network/Equipment: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw 876 Mode) 878 Used in Network: No Response 880 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 881 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 882 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 884 No Response 886 6.4. Respondent 4 888 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 889 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 891 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 893 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 895 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 896 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 897 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 898 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 899 but cannot provide a number. 901 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 - 1000 903 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 - 200 905 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 906 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 907 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 908 please select all which apply. 910 No Response 912 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 913 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 915 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: LSP Ping 917 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: LSP Ping 919 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 920 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 922 Supported by Network/Equipment: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw 923 Mode) 925 Used in Network: No Response 927 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 928 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 929 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 931 EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURER does not provide options to configure VCCV 932 control-channel and its sub options for LDP based L2Circuits. How 933 can we achieve end-to-end management and fault detection of PW 934 without VCCV in such cases? 936 6.5. Respondent 5 938 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 939 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 941 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 943 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 945 PPP - RFC 4618 946 Frame Relay (Port Mode) - RFC 4619 948 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 950 Fiber Channel (Port Mode) - draft-ietf-pwe3-fc-encap 952 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 953 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 954 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 955 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 956 but cannot provide a number. 958 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 - 4000 960 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 961 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 962 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 963 please select all which apply. 965 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: Control Word (Type 1), Router Alert 966 Label (Type 2) 968 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: Control Word (Type 1), Router Alert 969 Label (Type 2) 971 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 972 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 974 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: LSP Ping 976 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 977 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 979 Supported by Network/Equipment: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw 980 Mode) 982 Used in Network: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw Mode) 984 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 985 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 986 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 988 No Response 990 6.6. Respondent 6 992 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 993 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 995 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 997 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 999 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 1000 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 1001 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 1002 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 1003 but cannot provide a number. 1005 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 - 1000+ 1007 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 - 500 1009 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 1010 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 1011 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 1012 please select all which apply. 1014 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: Control Word (Type 1) 1016 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: Control Word (Type 1) 1018 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 1019 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 1021 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: ICMP Ping, LSP Ping 1023 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: ICMP Ping, LSP Ping 1025 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 1026 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 1028 Supported by Network/Equipment: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw 1029 Mode) 1031 Used in Network: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw Mode) 1033 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 1034 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 1035 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 1037 No Response 1039 6.7. Respondent 7 1041 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 1042 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 1044 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 1046 ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 1048 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 1049 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 1050 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 1051 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 1052 but cannot provide a number. 1054 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 - 20 1056 ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 - 100 1058 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 1059 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 1060 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 1061 please select all which apply. 1063 No Response 1065 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 1066 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 1068 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: LSP Ping 1070 ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717: LSP Ping 1072 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 1073 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 1075 Supported by Network/Equipment: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw 1076 Mode), PPP, HDLC, Frame Relay (Port Mode), ATM (N:1 Cell Mode) 1078 Used in Network: No Response 1080 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 1081 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 1082 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 1084 We are using L2PVPN AToM like-to-like models - ATMoMPLS - EoMPLS 1085 ATMoMPLS : This service offered for transporting ATM cells over IP/ 1086 MPLS core with Edge ATM CE devices including BPX, Ericsson Media 1087 Gateway etc. This is purely a Port mode with cell-packing 1088 configuration on it to have best performance. QoS marking is done 1089 for getting LLQ treatment in the core for these MPLS encapsulated ATM 1090 packets. EoMPLS: This service offered for transporting 2G/3G traffic 1091 from network such as Node-B to RNC's over IP/MPLS backbone core 1092 network. QoS marking is done for getting guaranteed bandwidth 1093 treatment in the core for these MPLS encapsulated ATM packets. In 1094 addition to basic L2VPN service configuration, these traffic are 1095 routed via MPLS TE tunnels with dedicated path and bandwidth defined 1096 to avoid bandwidth related congestion. 1098 6.8. Respondent 8 1100 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 1101 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 1103 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 1105 ATM (AAL5 SDU Mode) - RFC 4717 1107 TDMoIP - RFC 5087 1109 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 1110 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 1111 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 1112 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 1113 but cannot provide a number. 1115 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 - In-Use 1117 ATM (AAL5 SDU Mode) - RFC 4717 - In-Use 1119 TDMoIP - RFC 5087 - In-Use 1121 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 1122 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 1123 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 1124 please select all which apply. 1126 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: Control Word (Type 1) 1128 ATM (AAL5 SDU Mode) - RFC 4717: Router Alert Label (Type 2) 1130 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 1131 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 1133 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: LSP Ping 1135 ATM (AAL5 SDU Mode) - RFC 4717: LSP Ping 1137 TDMoIP - RFC 5087: LSP Ping 1139 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 1140 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 1142 Supported by Network/Equipment: Ethernet (Raw Mode), ATM (N:1 Cell 1143 Mode) 1145 Used in Network: Ethernet (Raw Mode), ATM (N:1 Cell Mode) 1147 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 1148 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 1149 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 1151 PW VCCV is very useful tool for finding faults in each PW channel. 1152 Without this we can not find fault on a PW channel. PW VCCV using 1153 BFD is another better option. Introperbility challences are with 1154 Ethernet OAM mechanism. 1156 6.9. Respondent 9 1158 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 1159 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 1161 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 1163 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 1165 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 1166 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 1167 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 1168 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 1169 but cannot provide a number. 1171 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 - 19385 1173 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 - 15757 1175 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 1176 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 1177 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 1178 please select all which apply. 1180 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619: Control Word (Type 1) 1182 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 1183 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 1185 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619: LSP Ping 1187 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 1188 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 1190 Supported by Network/Equipment: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw 1191 Mode), PPP, HDLC, Frame Relay (Port Mode), ATM (N:1 Cell Mode) 1193 Used in Network: No Response 1195 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 1196 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 1197 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 1199 No Response 1201 6.10. Respondent 10 1203 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 1204 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 1206 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 1208 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 1209 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 1210 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 1211 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 1212 but cannot provide a number. 1214 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 - 325 1216 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 1217 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 1218 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 1219 please select all which apply. 1221 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: Control Word (Type 1) 1223 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 1224 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 1226 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: ICMP Ping, LSP Ping 1228 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 1229 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 1231 Supported by Network/Equipment: No Response 1233 Used in Network: No Response 1235 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 1236 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 1237 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 1239 No Response 1241 6.11. Respondent 11 1243 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 1244 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 1246 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 1248 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 1250 PPP - RFC 4618 HDLC - RFC 4618 1252 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 1254 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 1255 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 1256 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 1257 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 1258 but cannot provide a number. 1260 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 - 2000 1262 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 - 100 1264 PPP - RFC 4618 - 500 1266 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 - 200 1268 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 1269 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 1270 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 1271 please select all which apply. 1273 No Response 1275 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 1276 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 1278 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: ICMP Ping, LSP Ping 1280 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: ICMP Ping, LSP Ping 1282 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619: ICMP Ping, LSP Ping 1283 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 1284 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 1286 Supported by Network/Equipment: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw 1287 Mode), PPP, HDLC 1289 Used in Network: Ethernet (Tagged Mode) 1291 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 1292 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 1293 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 1295 No Response 1297 6.12. Respondent 12 1299 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 1300 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 1302 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 1304 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 1305 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 1306 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 1307 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 1308 but cannot provide a number. 1310 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 - 50000 1312 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 1313 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 1314 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 1315 please select all which apply. 1317 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: Control Word (Type 1), Router Alert 1318 Label (Type 2), TTL Expiry (Type 3) 1320 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 1321 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 1323 No Response 1325 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 1326 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 1328 Supported by Network/Equipment: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw 1329 Mode) 1330 Used in Network: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw Mode) 1332 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 1333 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 1334 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 1336 No Response 1338 6.13. Respondent 13 1340 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 1341 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 1343 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 1345 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 1347 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 1349 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 1350 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 1351 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 1352 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 1353 but cannot provide a number. 1355 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 - 3 1357 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 - 10-20 1359 ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 - 3 1361 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 1362 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 1363 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 1364 please select all which apply. 1366 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: Control Word (Type 1), TTL Expiry 1367 (Type 3) 1369 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: Control Word (Type 1), TTL Expiry (Type 1370 3) 1372 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619: Control Word (Type 1), TTL Expiry 1373 (Type 3) 1375 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 1376 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 1378 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: ICMP Ping, LSP Ping 1380 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: ICMP Ping, LSP Ping 1382 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619: ICMP Ping, LSP Ping 1384 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 1385 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 1387 Supported by Network/Equipment: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw 1388 Mode), PPP, HDLC, Frame Relay (Port Mode), ATM (N:1 Cell Mode) 1390 Used in Network: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw Mode), Frame 1391 Relay (Port Mode) 1393 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 1394 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 1395 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 1397 No Response 1399 6.14. Respondent 14 1401 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 1402 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 1404 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 1406 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 1408 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 1409 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 1410 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 1411 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 1412 but cannot provide a number. 1414 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 - 150 1416 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 - 100 1418 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 1419 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 1420 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 1421 please select all which apply. 1423 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: Control Word (Type 1), Router Alert 1424 Label (Type 2) 1425 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: Control Word (Type 1), Router Alert 1426 Label (Type 2) 1428 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 1429 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 1431 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: LSP Ping 1433 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: LSP Ping 1435 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 1436 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 1438 Supported by Network/Equipment: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw 1439 Mode), PPP, HDLC, Frame Relay (Port Mode) 1441 Used in Network: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw Mode) 1443 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 1444 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 1445 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 1447 No Response 1449 6.15. Respondent 15 1451 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 1452 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 1454 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 1456 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 1458 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 1460 ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 1462 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 1463 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 1464 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 1465 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 1466 but cannot provide a number. 1468 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 - 20,000 1470 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 - 1000 1472 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 - 30,000 1473 ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 - 20,000 1475 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 1476 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 1477 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 1478 please select all which apply. 1480 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: TTL Expiry (Type 3) 1482 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: TTL Expiry (Type 3) 1484 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619: TTL Expiry (Type 3) 1486 ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717: TTL Expiry (Type 3) 1488 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 1489 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 1491 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: LSP Ping 1493 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: LSP Ping 1495 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619: LSP Ping 1497 ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717: LSP Ping 1499 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 1500 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 1502 Supported by Network/Equipment: No Response 1504 Used in Network: No Response 1506 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 1507 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 1508 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 1510 COMPANY has deployed several MPLS network elements, from multiple 1511 vendors. COMPANY is seeking a uniform implementation of VCCV Control 1512 Channel (CC) capabilities across its various vendor platforms. This 1513 will provide COMPANY with significant advantages in reduced 1514 operational overheads when handling cross-domain faults. Having a 1515 uniform VCCV feature implementation in COMPANY multi-vendor network 1516 leads to: o Reduced operational cost and complexity o Reduced OSS 1517 development to coordinate incompatible VCCV implementations. o 1518 Increased end-end service availability when handing faults. In 1519 addition, currently some of COMPANY deployed VCCV traffic flows (on 1520 some vendor platforms) are not guaranteed to follow those of the 1521 customer's application traffic (a key operational requirement). As a 1522 result, the response from the circuit ping cannot faithfully reflect 1523 the status of the circuit. This leads to ambiguity regarding the 1524 operational status of our networks. An in-band method is highly 1525 preferred, with COMPANY having a clear preference for VCCV Circuit 1526 Ping using PWE Control Word. This preference is being pursued with 1527 each of COMPANY vendors. 1529 6.16. Respondent 16 1531 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 1532 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 1534 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 1536 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 1538 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 1539 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 1540 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 1541 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 1542 but cannot provide a number. 1544 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 - 100 1546 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 - 100 1548 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 1549 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 1550 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 1551 please select all which apply. 1553 No Response 1555 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 1556 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 1558 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: ICMP Ping, LSP Ping 1560 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: ICMP Ping, LSP Ping 1562 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 1563 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 1565 Supported by Network/Equipment: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw 1566 Mode) 1568 Used in Network: No Resposne 1569 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 1570 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 1571 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 1573 Using CV is not required at the moment 1575 6.17. Respondent 17 1577 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 1578 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 1580 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 1582 SAToP - RFC 4553 1584 Frame Relay (Port Mode) - RFC 4619 1586 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 1588 ATM (N:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 1590 ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 1592 CESoPSN - RFC 5086 1594 TDMoIP - RFC 5087 1596 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 1597 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 1598 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 1599 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 1600 but cannot provide a number. 1602 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 - >40k 1604 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 - In-Use 1606 SAToP - RFC 4553 - >20k 1608 Frame Relay (Port Mode) - RFC 4619 - >5k 1610 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 - >5k 1612 ATM (N:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 - >50k 1614 ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 - >50k 1616 CESoPSN - RFC 5086 - >20k 1617 TDMoIP - RFC 5087 - >20k 1619 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 1620 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 1621 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 1622 please select all which apply. 1624 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: Control Word (Type 1) 1626 SAToP - RFC 4553: Control Word (Type 1) 1628 Frame Relay (Port Mode) - RFC 4619: Control Word (Type 1) 1630 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619: Control Word (Type 1) 1632 ATM (N:1 Mode) - RFC 4717: Control Word (Type 1) 1634 ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717: Control Word (Type 1) 1636 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 1637 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 1639 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: LSP Ping 1641 SAToP - RFC 4553: LSP Ping 1643 Frame Relay (Port Mode) - RFC 4619: LSP Ping 1645 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619: LSP Ping 1647 ATM (N:1 Mode) - RFC 4717: LSP Ping 1649 ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717: LSP Ping 1651 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 1652 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 1654 Supported by Network/Equipment: ATM (N:1 Cell Mode) 1656 Used in Network: No Response 1658 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 1659 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 1660 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 1662 BFD VCCV Control Channel is not indicated in the survey (may be 1663 required for PW redundancy purpose) 1665 7. Informative References 1667 [RFC5085] Nadeau, T., Ed. and C. Pignataro, Ed., "Pseudowire Virtual 1668 Circuit Connectivity Verification (VCCV): A Control 1669 Channel for Pseudowires", December 2007. 1671 Author's Address 1673 Christopher N. "Nick" Del Regno (editor) 1674 Verizon Communications Inc 1675 400 International Pkwy 1676 Richardson, TX 75081 1677 US 1679 Email: nick.delregno@verizon.com