idnits 2.17.00 (12 Aug 2021) /tmp/idnits58651/draft-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 doesn't use any RFC 2119 keywords, yet seems to have RFC 2119 boilerplate text. -- The document date (September 20, 2011) is 3896 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Informational ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 2 warnings (==), 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 September 20, 2011 5 Expires: March 23, 2012 7 The Pseudowire (PW) & Virtual Circuit Connectivity Verification (VCCV) 8 Implementation Survey Results 9 draft-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 Requirements Language 29 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 30 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 31 document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. 33 Status of this Memo 35 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 36 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 38 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 39 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 40 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 41 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 43 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 44 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 45 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 46 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 48 This Internet-Draft will expire on March 23, 2012. 50 Copyright Notice 52 Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 53 document authors. All rights reserved. 55 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 56 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 57 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 58 publication of this document. Please review these documents 59 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 60 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 61 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 62 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 63 described in the Simplified BSD License. 65 Table of Contents 67 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 68 1.1. PW/VCCV Survey Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 69 1.2. PW/VCCV Survey Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 70 1.3. PW/VCCV Survey Highlights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 71 2. Survey Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 72 2.1. Respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 73 2.2. Pseudowire Encapsulations Implemented . . . . . . . . . . 8 74 2.3. Number of Pseudowires Deployed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 75 2.4. VCCV Control Channel In Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 76 2.5. VCCV Connectivity Verification Types In Use . . . . . . . 12 77 2.6. Control Word Support for Encaps for which CW is 78 Optional . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 79 2.7. Open Ended Question . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 80 3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 81 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 82 5. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 83 6. Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 84 6.1. Respondent 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 85 6.2. Respondent 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 86 6.3. Respondent 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 87 6.4. Respondent 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 88 6.5. Respondent 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 89 6.6. Respondent 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 90 6.7. Respondent 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 91 6.8. Respondent 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 92 6.9. Respondent 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 93 6.10. Respondent 10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 94 6.11. Respondent 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 95 6.12. Respondent 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 96 6.13. Respondent 13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 97 6.14. Respondent 14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 98 6.15. Respondent 15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 99 6.16. Respondent 16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 100 6.17. Respondent 17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 101 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 102 7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 103 7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 104 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 106 1. Introduction 108 The PWE3 working group has defined many encapsulations of various 109 Layer 1 and Layer 2 links. Within these encapsulations, there are 110 often several modes of encapsulation which have differing 111 requirements in order to fully emulate the service. As such, the use 112 of the PWE3 Control Word is mandated in many of the encapsulations, 113 but not all. This can present interoperability issues related to A) 114 Control Word use and B) VCCV Control Channel negotiation in mixed 115 implementation environments. 117 The encapsulations and modes for which the Control Word is currently 118 optional are: 120 o Ethernet Tagged Mode 122 o Ethernet Raw Mode 124 o PPP 126 o HDLC 128 o Frame Relay Port Mode 130 o ATM (N:1 Cell Mode) 132 [RFC5085] defines three Control Channel types for MPLS PW's: Type 1, 133 using the Pseudowire Control Word, Type 2, using the Router Alert 134 Label, and Type 3, using TTL Expiration (e.g. MPLS PW Label with TTL 135 == 1). While Type 2 (RA Label) is indicated as being "the preferred 136 mode of VCCV operation when the Control Word is not present," RFC 137 5085 does not indicate a mandatory Control Channel to ensure 138 interoperable implementations. The closest it comes to mandating a 139 control channel is the requirement to support Type 1 (Control Word) 140 whenever the control word is present. As such, the three options 141 yield seven implementation permutations (assuming you have to support 142 at least one Control Channel type to provide VCCV). Due to these 143 permuations, interoperability challenges have been identified by 144 several VCCV users. 146 In order to assess the best approach to address the observed 147 interoperability issues, the PWE3 working group decided to solicit 148 feedback from the PW and VCCV user community regarding 149 implementation. This document presents the survey and the 150 information returned by the user community who participated. 152 1.1. PW/VCCV Survey Overview 154 Per the direction of the PWE3 Working Group chairs, a survey was 155 created to sample the nature of implementations of Pseudowires, with 156 specific emphasis on Control Word usage, and VCCV, with emphasis on 157 Control Channel and Control Type usage. The survey consisted of a 158 series of questions based on direction of the WG chairs and the 159 survey opened to the public on November 4, 2010. The URL for the 160 survey (now closed) was http://www.surveymonkey.com/pwe3/. The 161 survey ran from November 4, 2010 until February 25, 2011. 163 1.2. PW/VCCV Survey Form 165 The PW/VCCV Implementation Survey requested the following information 166 about user implementations: 168 - Responding Organziation. No provisions were made for anonymity. 169 All responses required a valid email address in order to validate the 170 survey response. 172 - Of the various encapsulations (and options therein) known at the 173 time, including the WG draft for Fiber Channel), which were 174 implemented b the respondent. These included: 176 o Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 178 o Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 180 o SAToP - RFC 4553 182 o PPP - RFC 4618 184 o HDLC - RFC 4618 186 o Frame Relay (Port Mode) - RFC 4619 188 o Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 190 o ATM (N:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 192 o ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 194 o ATM (AAL5 SDU Mode) - RFC 4717 196 o ATM (AAL5 PDU Mode) - RFC 4717 198 o CEP - RFC 4842 199 o CESoPSN - RFC 5086 201 o TDMoIP - RFC 5087 203 o Fiber Channel (Port Mode) - draft-ietf-pwe3-fc-encap 205 - Approximately how many Pseudowires of each type were deployed. 206 Respondents could list a number, or for the sake of privacy, could 207 just respond "In-Use" instead. 209 - For each encapsulation listed above, the respondent could indicated 210 which Control Channel was in use. The options listed were: 212 o Control Word (Type 1) 214 o Router Alert Label (Type 2) 216 o TTL Expiry (Type 3) 218 - For each encapsulation listed above, the respondent could indicate 219 which Connectivity Verification types were in use. The options were: 221 o ICMP Ping 223 o LSP Ping 225 - For each encapsulation type for which the use of the Control Word 226 is optional, the respondents could indicated the encaps for which 227 Control Word was supported by the equipment used and whether it was 228 in use in the network. The encaps listed were: 230 o Ethernet (Tagged Mode) 232 o Ethernet (Raw Mode) 234 o PPP 236 o HDLC 238 o Frame Relay (Port Mode) 240 o ATM (N:1 Cell Mode) 242 - Finally, a freeform entry was provided for the respondent to 243 provide feedback regarding PW and VCCV deployments, VCCV 244 interoperability challenges, the survey or any network/vendor details 245 they wished to share. 247 1.3. PW/VCCV Survey Highlights 249 There were 17 valid responses to the survey. The following companies 250 responded. 252 2. Survey Results 254 2.1. Respondents 256 The following companies participated in the PW/VCCV Implementation 257 Survey. The data provided has been aggregated. No specific 258 company's reponse will be detailed herein. 260 o Time Warner Cable 262 o Bright House Networks 264 o Tinet 266 o AboveNet 268 o Telecom New Zealand 270 o Cox Communications 272 o MTN South Africa 274 o Wipro Technologies 276 o Verizon 278 o AMS-IX 280 o Superonline 282 o Deutsche Telekom AG 284 o Internet Solution 286 o Easynet Global Services 288 o Telstra Corporation 290 o OJSC MegaFon 292 o France Telecom Orange 294 2.2. Pseudowire Encapsulations Implemented 296 The following question was asked: "In your network in general, across 297 all products, please indicate which Pseudowire encapsulations your 298 company has implemented." Of all responses, the following list shows 299 the percentage of responses for each encapsulation: 301 o Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 = 76.5% 303 o Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 = 82.4% 305 o SAToP - RFC 4553 = 11.8% 307 o PPP - RFC 4618 = 11.8% 309 o HDLC - RFC 4618 = 5.9% 311 o Frame Relay (Port Mode) - RFC 4619 = 17.6% 313 o Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 = 41.2% 315 o ATM (N:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 = 5.9% 317 o ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 = 17.6% 319 o ATM (AAL5 SDU Mode) - RFC 4717 = 5.9% 321 o ATM (AAL5 PDU Mode) - RFC 4717 = 0.0% 323 o CEP - RFC 4842 = 0.0% 325 o CESoPSN - RFC 5086 = 11.8% 327 o TDMoIP - RFC 5087 = 11.8% 329 o Fiber Channel (Port Mode) - draft-ietf-pwe3-fc-encap = 5.9% 331 2.3. Number of Pseudowires Deployed 333 The following question was asked: "Approximately how many Pseudowires 334 are deployed of each encapsulation type. Note, this should be the 335 number of pseudowires in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned 336 to do so." The following list shows the number of psudowires in use 337 for each encapsulation: 339 o Ethernet Tagged Mode = 93,861 340 o Ethernet Raw Mode = 94,231 342 o SAToP - RFC 4553 = 20,050 344 o PPP - RFC 4618 = 500 346 o HDLC - RFC 4618 = 0 348 o Frame Relay (Port Mode) - RFC 4619 = 5,002 350 o Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 = 50,959 352 o ATM (N:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 = 50,000 354 o ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 = 70,103 356 o ATM (AAL5 SDU Mode) - RFC 4717 = 0 358 o ATM (AAL5 PDU Mode) - RFC 4717 = 0 360 o CEP - RFC 4842 = 0 362 o CESoPSN - RFC 5086 = 21,600 364 o TDMoIP - RFC 5087 = 20,000 366 o Fiber Channel (Port Mode) - draft-ietf-pwe3-fc-encap = 0 368 In the above responses, on several occasions the response was in the 369 form of "> XXXXX" where the response indicated a number greater than 370 the one provided. Where applicable, the number itself was used in 371 the sums above. For example, ">20K" and "20K+" yielded 20K. 373 Additionally, the following encaps were listed as "In-Use" with no 374 quantity provided: 376 o Ethernet Raw Mode: 2 Responses 378 o ATM (AAL5 SDU Mode): 1 Response 380 o TDMoIP: 1 Response 382 2.4. VCCV Control Channel In Use 384 The following instructions were given: "Please indicate which VCCV 385 Control Channel is used for each encapsulation type. Understanding 386 that users may have different networks with varying implementations, 387 for your network in general, please select all which apply." The 388 numbers below indicate the number of responses. The responses were: 390 o Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 392 * Control Word (Type 1) = 7 394 * Router Alert Label (Type 2) = 3 396 * TTL Expiry (Type 3) = 3 398 o Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 400 * Control Word (Type 1) = 8 402 * Router Alert Label (Type 2) = 4 404 * TTL Expiry (Type 3) = 4 406 o SAToP - RFC 4553 408 * Control Word (Type 1) = 1 410 * Router Alert Label (Type 2) = 0 412 * TTL Expiry (Type 3) = 0 414 o PPP - RFC 4618 416 * Control Word (Type 1) = 0 418 * Router Alert Label (Type 2) = 0 420 * TTL Expiry (Type 3) = 0 422 o HDLC - RFC 4618 424 * Control Word (Type 1) = 0 426 * Router Alert Label (Type 2) = 0 428 * TTL Expiry (Type 3) = 0 430 o Frame Relay (Port Mode) - RFC 4619 432 * Control Word (Type 1) = 1 434 * Router Alert Label (Type 2) = 0 435 * TTL Expiry (Type 3) = 0 437 o Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 439 * Control Word (Type 1) = 3 441 * Router Alert Label (Type 2) = 0 443 * TTL Expiry (Type 3) = 2 445 o ATM (N:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 447 * Control Word (Type 1) = 1 449 * Router Alert Label (Type 2) = 0 451 * TTL Expiry (Type 3) = 0 453 o ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 455 * Control Word (Type 1) = 1 457 * Router Alert Label (Type 2) = 0 459 * TTL Expiry (Type 3) = 1 461 o ATM (AAL5 SDU Mode) - RFC 4717 463 * Control Word (Type 1) = 0 465 * Router Alert Label (Type 2) = 1 467 * TTL Expiry (Type 3) = 0 469 o ATM (AAL5 PDU Mode) - RFC 4717 471 * Control Word (Type 1) = 0 473 * Router Alert Label (Type 2) = 0 475 * TTL Expiry (Type 3) = 0 477 o CEP - RFC 4842 479 * Control Word (Type 1) = 0 481 * Router Alert Label (Type 2) = 0 482 * TTL Expiry (Type 3) = 0 484 o CESoPSN - RFC 5086 486 * Control Word (Type 1) = 0 488 * Router Alert Label (Type 2) = 0 490 * TTL Expiry (Type 3) = 1 492 o TDMoIP - RFC 5087 494 * Control Word (Type 1) = 0 496 * Router Alert Label (Type 2) = 0 498 * TTL Expiry (Type 3) = 0 500 o Fiber Channel (Port Mode) - draft-ietf-pwe3-fc-encap 502 * Control Word (Type 1) = 0 504 * Router Alert Label (Type 2) = 0 506 * TTL Expiry (Type 3) = 0 508 2.5. VCCV Connectivity Verification Types In Use 510 The following instructions were given: "Please indicate which VCCV 511 Connectivity Verification types are used in your networks for each 512 encapsulation type." Note that BFD was not one of the choices. The 513 responses were as follows: 515 o Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 517 * ICMP Ping = 5 519 * LSP Ping = 11 521 o Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 523 * ICMP Ping = 6 525 * LSP Ping = 11 527 o SAToP - RFC 4553 528 * ICMP Ping = 0 530 * LSP Ping = 2 532 o PPP - RFC 4618 534 * ICMP Ping = 0 536 * LSP Ping = 0 538 o HDLC - RFC 4618 540 * ICMP Ping = 0 542 * LSP Ping = 0 544 o Frame Relay (Port Mode) - RFC 4619 546 * ICMP Ping = 0 548 * LSP Ping = 1 550 o Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 552 * ICMP Ping = 2 554 * LSP Ping = 5 556 o ATM (N:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 558 * ICMP Ping = 0 560 * LSP Ping = 1 562 o ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 564 * ICMP Ping = 0 566 * LSP Ping = 3 568 o ATM (AAL5 SDU Mode) - RFC 4717 570 * ICMP Ping = 0 572 * LSP Ping = 1 574 o ATM (AAL5 PDU Mode) - RFC 4717 576 * ICMP Ping = 0 578 * LSP Ping = 0 580 o CEP - RFC 4842 582 * ICMP Ping = 0 584 * LSP Ping = 0 586 o CESoPSN - RFC 5086 588 * ICMP Ping = 0 590 * LSP Ping = 1 592 o TDMoIP - RFC 5087 594 * ICMP Ping = 0 596 * LSP Ping = 1 598 o Fiber Channel (Port Mode) - draft-ietf-pwe3-fc-encap 600 * ICMP Ping = 0 602 * LSP Ping = 0 604 2.6. Control Word Support for Encaps for which CW is Optional 606 The following instructions were given: "Please indicate your 607 network's support of and use of the Control Word for encapsulations 608 for which the Control Word is optional." The responses were: 610 o Ethernet (Tagged Mode) 612 * Supported by Network/Equipment = 13 614 * Used in Network = 6 616 o Ethernet (Raw Mode) 618 * Supported by Network/Equipment = 14 620 * Used in Network = 7 622 o PPP 624 * Supported by Network/Equipment = 5 626 * Used in Network = 0 628 o HDLC 630 * Supported by Network/Equipment = 4 632 * Used in Network = 0 634 o Frame Relay (Port Mode) 636 * Supported by Network/Equipment = 3 638 * Used in Network = 1 640 o ATM (N:1 Cell Mode) 642 * Supported by Network/Equipment = 5 644 * Used in Network = 1 646 2.7. Open Ended Question 648 Space was provided for user feedback. The following instructions 649 were given: "Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding 650 PW and VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this 651 survey or any network/vendor details you wish to share." Below are 652 the responses, made anonymous. 654 1. BFD VCCV Control Channel is not indicated in the survey (may be 655 required for PW redundancy purpose) 657 2. Using CV is not required at the moment 659 3. COMPANY has deployed several MPLS network elements, from multiple 660 vendors. COMPANY is seeking a uniform implementation of VCCV 661 Control Channel (CC) capabilities across its various vendor 662 platforms. This will provide COMPANY with significant advantages 663 in reduced operational overheads when handling cross-domain 664 faults. Having a uniform VCCV feature implementation in COMPANY 665 multi-vendor network leads to: o Reduced operational cost and 666 complexity o Reduced OSS development to coordinate incompatible 667 VCCV implementations. o Increased end-end service availability 668 when handing faults. In addition, currently some of COMPANY 669 deployed VCCV traffic flows (on some vendor platforms) are not 670 guaranteed to follow those of the customer's application traffic 671 (a key operational requirement). As a result, the response from 672 the circuit ping cannot faithfully reflect the status of the 673 circuit. This leads to ambiguity regarding the operational 674 status of our networks. An in-band method is highly preferred, 675 with COMPANY having a clear preference for VCCV Circuit Ping 676 using PWE Control Word. This preference is being pursued with 677 each of COMPANY vendors. 679 4. PW VCCV is very useful tool for finding faults in each PW 680 channel. Without this we can not find fault on a PW channel. PW 681 VCCV using BFD is another better option. Introperbility 682 challences are with Ethernet OAM mechanism. 684 5. We are using L2PVPN AToM like-to-like models - ATMoMPLS - EoMPLS 685 ATMoMPLS : This service offered for transporting ATM cells over 686 IP/MPLS core with Edge ATM CE devices including BPX, Ericsson 687 Media Gateway etc. This is purely a Port mode with cell-packing 688 configuration on it to have best performance. QoS marking is 689 done for getting LLQ treatment in the core for these MPLS 690 encapsulated ATM packets. EoMPLS: This service offered for 691 transporting 2G/3G traffic from network such as Node-B to RNC's 692 over IP/MPLS backbone core network. QoS marking is done for 693 getting guaranteed bandwidth treatment in the core for these MPLS 694 encapsulated ATM packets. In addition to basic L2VPN service 695 configuration, these traffic are routed via MPLS TE tunnels with 696 dedicated path and bandwidth defined to avoid bandwidth related 697 congestion. 699 6. EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURER does not provide options to configure VCCV 700 control-channel and its sub options for LDP based L2Circuits. 701 How can we achieve end-to-end management and fault detection of 702 PW without VCCV in such cases? 704 7. I'm very interested in this work as we continue to experience 705 interop challenges particularly with newer vendors to the space 706 who are only implementing VCCV via control word. Vendors who 707 have tailed their MPLS OAM set specifically to the cell backhaul 708 space and mandatory CW have been known to fall into this space. 709 That's all I've got. 711 3. Security Considerations 713 As this document is a report of the PW/VCCV User Implementation 714 Survey results, no security considerations are introduced. 716 4. IANA Considerations 718 This document has no actions for IANA. 720 5. Acknowledgements 722 I would like to thank the chairs of the PWE3 Working Group for their 723 guidance and review of the Survey questions. I would also like to 724 sincerly thank those who took the time and effort to participate. 726 6. Appendix 728 The detailed reponses are included in this appendix. The respondent 729 contact info has been removed. 731 6.1. Respondent 1 733 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 734 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 736 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 738 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 739 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 740 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 741 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 742 but cannot provide a number. 744 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 - 423 746 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 747 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 748 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 749 please select all which apply. 751 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: Control Word (Type 1) 753 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 754 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 756 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: LSP Ping 758 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 759 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 761 Supported by Network/Equipment: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw 762 Mode) 764 Used in Network: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw Mode) 766 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 767 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 768 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 770 No Response 772 6.2. Respondent 2 774 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 775 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 777 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 779 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 781 SAToP - RFC 4553 783 CESoPSN - RFC 5086 785 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 786 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 787 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 788 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 789 but cannot provide a number. 791 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 - 5000 793 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 - 1000 795 SAToP - RFC 4553 - 50 797 CESoPSN - RFC 5086 - 1600 799 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 800 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 801 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 802 please select all which apply. 804 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: Control Word (Type 1), Router Alert 805 Label (Type 2), TTL Expiry (Type 3) 807 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: Control Word (Type 1), Router Alert 808 Label (Type 2), TTL Expiry (Type 3) 809 CESoPSN - RFC 5086: TTL Expiry (Type 3) 811 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 812 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 814 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: ICMP Ping, LSP Ping 816 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: ICMP Ping, LSP Ping 818 SAToP - RFC 4553: LSP Ping 820 CESoPSN - RFC 5086: LSP Ping 822 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 823 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 825 Supported by Network/Equipment: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw 826 Mode) 828 Used in Network: No Response 830 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 831 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 832 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 834 I'm very interested in this work as we continue to experience interop 835 challenges particularly with newer vendors to the space who are only 836 implementing VCCV via control word. Vendors who have tailed their 837 MPLS OAM set specifically to the cell backhaul space and mandatory CW 838 have been known to fall into this space. That's all I've got. 840 6.3. Respondent 3 842 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 843 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 845 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 847 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 849 Frame Relay (Port Mode) - RFC 4619 851 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 853 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 854 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 855 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 856 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 857 but cannot provide a number. 859 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 - 800 861 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 - 50 863 Frame Relay (Port Mode) - RFC 4619 - 2 865 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 - 2 867 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 868 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 869 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 870 please select all which apply. 872 No Response 874 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 875 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 877 No Response 879 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 880 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 882 Supported by Network/Equipment: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw 883 Mode) 885 Used in Network: No Response 887 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 888 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 889 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 891 No Response 893 6.4. Respondent 4 895 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 896 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 898 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 900 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 902 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 903 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 904 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 905 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 906 but cannot provide a number. 908 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 - 1000 910 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 - 200 912 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 913 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 914 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 915 please select all which apply. 917 No Response 919 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 920 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 922 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: LSP Ping 924 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: LSP Ping 926 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 927 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 929 Supported by Network/Equipment: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw 930 Mode) 932 Used in Network: No Response 934 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 935 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 936 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 938 EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURER does not provide options to configure VCCV 939 control-channel and its sub options for LDP based L2Circuits. How 940 can we achieve end-to-end management and fault detection of PW 941 without VCCV in such cases? 943 6.5. Respondent 5 945 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 946 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 948 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 950 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 952 PPP - RFC 4618 953 Frame Relay (Port Mode) - RFC 4619 955 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 957 Fiber Channel (Port Mode) - draft-ietf-pwe3-fc-encap 959 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 960 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 961 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 962 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 963 but cannot provide a number. 965 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 - 4000 967 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 968 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 969 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 970 please select all which apply. 972 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: Control Word (Type 1), Router Alert 973 Label (Type 2) 975 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: Control Word (Type 1), Router Alert 976 Label (Type 2) 978 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 979 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 981 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: LSP Ping 983 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 984 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 986 Supported by Network/Equipment: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw 987 Mode) 989 Used in Network: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw Mode) 991 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 992 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 993 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 995 No Response 997 6.6. Respondent 6 999 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 1000 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 1002 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 1004 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 1006 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 1007 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 1008 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 1009 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 1010 but cannot provide a number. 1012 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 - 1000+ 1014 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 - 500 1016 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 1017 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 1018 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 1019 please select all which apply. 1021 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: Control Word (Type 1) 1023 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: Control Word (Type 1) 1025 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 1026 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 1028 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: ICMP Ping, LSP Ping 1030 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: ICMP Ping, LSP Ping 1032 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 1033 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 1035 Supported by Network/Equipment: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw 1036 Mode) 1038 Used in Network: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw Mode) 1040 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 1041 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 1042 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 1044 No Response 1046 6.7. Respondent 7 1048 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 1049 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 1051 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 1053 ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 1055 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 1056 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 1057 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 1058 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 1059 but cannot provide a number. 1061 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 - 20 1063 ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 - 100 1065 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 1066 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 1067 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 1068 please select all which apply. 1070 No Response 1072 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 1073 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 1075 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: LSP Ping 1077 ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717: LSP Ping 1079 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 1080 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 1082 Supported by Network/Equipment: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw 1083 Mode), PPP, HDLC, Frame Relay (Port Mode), ATM (N:1 Cell Mode) 1085 Used in Network: No Response 1087 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 1088 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 1089 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 1091 We are using L2PVPN AToM like-to-like models - ATMoMPLS - EoMPLS 1092 ATMoMPLS : This service offered for transporting ATM cells over IP/ 1093 MPLS core with Edge ATM CE devices including BPX, Ericsson Media 1094 Gateway etc. This is purely a Port mode with cell-packing 1095 configuration on it to have best performance. QoS marking is done 1096 for getting LLQ treatment in the core for these MPLS encapsulated ATM 1097 packets. EoMPLS: This service offered for transporting 2G/3G traffic 1098 from network such as Node-B to RNC's over IP/MPLS backbone core 1099 network. QoS marking is done for getting guaranteed bandwidth 1100 treatment in the core for these MPLS encapsulated ATM packets. In 1101 addition to basic L2VPN service configuration, these traffic are 1102 routed via MPLS TE tunnels with dedicated path and bandwidth defined 1103 to avoid bandwidth related congestion. 1105 6.8. Respondent 8 1107 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 1108 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 1110 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 1112 ATM (AAL5 SDU Mode) - RFC 4717 1114 TDMoIP - RFC 5087 1116 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 1117 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 1118 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 1119 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 1120 but cannot provide a number. 1122 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 - In-Use 1124 ATM (AAL5 SDU Mode) - RFC 4717 - In-Use 1126 TDMoIP - RFC 5087 - In-Use 1128 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 1129 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 1130 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 1131 please select all which apply. 1133 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: Control Word (Type 1) 1135 ATM (AAL5 SDU Mode) - RFC 4717: Router Alert Label (Type 2) 1137 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 1138 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 1140 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: LSP Ping 1142 ATM (AAL5 SDU Mode) - RFC 4717: LSP Ping 1144 TDMoIP - RFC 5087: LSP Ping 1146 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 1147 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 1149 Supported by Network/Equipment: Ethernet (Raw Mode), ATM (N:1 Cell 1150 Mode) 1152 Used in Network: Ethernet (Raw Mode), ATM (N:1 Cell Mode) 1154 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 1155 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 1156 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 1158 PW VCCV is very useful tool for finding faults in each PW channel. 1159 Without this we can not find fault on a PW channel. PW VCCV using 1160 BFD is another better option. Introperbility challences are with 1161 Ethernet OAM mechanism. 1163 6.9. Respondent 9 1165 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 1166 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 1168 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 1170 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 1172 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 1173 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 1174 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 1175 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 1176 but cannot provide a number. 1178 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 - 19385 1180 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 - 15757 1182 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 1183 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 1184 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 1185 please select all which apply. 1187 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619: Control Word (Type 1) 1189 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 1190 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 1192 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619: LSP Ping 1194 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 1195 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 1197 Supported by Network/Equipment: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw 1198 Mode), PPP, HDLC, Frame Relay (Port Mode), ATM (N:1 Cell Mode) 1200 Used in Network: No Response 1202 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 1203 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 1204 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 1206 No Response 1208 6.10. Respondent 10 1210 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 1211 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 1213 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 1215 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 1216 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 1217 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 1218 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 1219 but cannot provide a number. 1221 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 - 325 1223 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 1224 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 1225 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 1226 please select all which apply. 1228 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: Control Word (Type 1) 1230 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 1231 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 1233 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: ICMP Ping, LSP Ping 1235 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 1236 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 1238 Supported by Network/Equipment: No Response 1240 Used in Network: No Response 1242 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 1243 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 1244 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 1246 No Response 1248 6.11. Respondent 11 1250 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 1251 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 1253 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 1255 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 1257 PPP - RFC 4618 HDLC - RFC 4618 1259 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 1261 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 1262 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 1263 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 1264 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 1265 but cannot provide a number. 1267 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 - 2000 1269 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 - 100 1271 PPP - RFC 4618 - 500 1273 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 - 200 1275 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 1276 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 1277 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 1278 please select all which apply. 1280 No Response 1282 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 1283 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 1285 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: ICMP Ping, LSP Ping 1287 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: ICMP Ping, LSP Ping 1289 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619: ICMP Ping, LSP Ping 1290 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 1291 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 1293 Supported by Network/Equipment: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw 1294 Mode), PPP, HDLC 1296 Used in Network: Ethernet (Tagged Mode) 1298 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 1299 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 1300 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 1302 No Response 1304 6.12. Respondent 12 1306 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 1307 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 1309 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 1311 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 1312 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 1313 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 1314 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 1315 but cannot provide a number. 1317 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 - 50000 1319 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 1320 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 1321 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 1322 please select all which apply. 1324 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: Control Word (Type 1), Router Alert 1325 Label (Type 2), TTL Expiry (Type 3) 1327 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 1328 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 1330 No Response 1332 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 1333 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 1335 Supported by Network/Equipment: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw 1336 Mode) 1337 Used in Network: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw Mode) 1339 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 1340 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 1341 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 1343 No Response 1345 6.13. Respondent 13 1347 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 1348 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 1350 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 1352 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 1354 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 1356 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 1357 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 1358 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 1359 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 1360 but cannot provide a number. 1362 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 - 3 1364 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 - 10-20 1366 ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 - 3 1368 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 1369 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 1370 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 1371 please select all which apply. 1373 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: Control Word (Type 1), TTL Expiry 1374 (Type 3) 1376 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: Control Word (Type 1), TTL Expiry (Type 1377 3) 1379 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619: Control Word (Type 1), TTL Expiry 1380 (Type 3) 1382 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 1383 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 1385 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: ICMP Ping, LSP Ping 1387 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: ICMP Ping, LSP Ping 1389 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619: ICMP Ping, LSP Ping 1391 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 1392 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 1394 Supported by Network/Equipment: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw 1395 Mode), PPP, HDLC, Frame Relay (Port Mode), ATM (N:1 Cell Mode) 1397 Used in Network: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw Mode), Frame 1398 Relay (Port Mode) 1400 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 1401 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 1402 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 1404 No Response 1406 6.14. Respondent 14 1408 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 1409 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 1411 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 1413 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 1415 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 1416 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 1417 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 1418 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 1419 but cannot provide a number. 1421 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 - 150 1423 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 - 100 1425 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 1426 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 1427 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 1428 please select all which apply. 1430 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: Control Word (Type 1), Router Alert 1431 Label (Type 2) 1432 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: Control Word (Type 1), Router Alert 1433 Label (Type 2) 1435 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 1436 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 1438 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: LSP Ping 1440 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: LSP Ping 1442 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 1443 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 1445 Supported by Network/Equipment: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw 1446 Mode), PPP, HDLC, Frame Relay (Port Mode) 1448 Used in Network: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw Mode) 1450 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 1451 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 1452 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 1454 No Response 1456 6.15. Respondent 15 1458 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 1459 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 1461 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 1463 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 1465 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 1467 ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 1469 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 1470 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 1471 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 1472 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 1473 but cannot provide a number. 1475 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 - 20,000 1477 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 - 1000 1479 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 - 30,000 1480 ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 - 20,000 1482 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 1483 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 1484 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 1485 please select all which apply. 1487 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: TTL Expiry (Type 3) 1489 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: TTL Expiry (Type 3) 1491 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619: TTL Expiry (Type 3) 1493 ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717: TTL Expiry (Type 3) 1495 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 1496 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 1498 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: LSP Ping 1500 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: LSP Ping 1502 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619: LSP Ping 1504 ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717: LSP Ping 1506 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 1507 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 1509 Supported by Network/Equipment: No Response 1511 Used in Network: No Response 1513 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 1514 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 1515 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 1517 COMPANY has deployed several MPLS network elements, from multiple 1518 vendors. COMPANY is seeking a uniform implementation of VCCV Control 1519 Channel (CC) capabilities across its various vendor platforms. This 1520 will provide COMPANY with significant advantages in reduced 1521 operational overheads when handling cross-domain faults. Having a 1522 uniform VCCV feature implementation in COMPANY multi-vendor network 1523 leads to: o Reduced operational cost and complexity o Reduced OSS 1524 development to coordinate incompatible VCCV implementations. o 1525 Increased end-end service availability when handing faults. In 1526 addition, currently some of COMPANY deployed VCCV traffic flows (on 1527 some vendor platforms) are not guaranteed to follow those of the 1528 customer's application traffic (a key operational requirement). As a 1529 result, the response from the circuit ping cannot faithfully reflect 1530 the status of the circuit. This leads to ambiguity regarding the 1531 operational status of our networks. An in-band method is highly 1532 preferred, with COMPANY having a clear preference for VCCV Circuit 1533 Ping using PWE Control Word. This preference is being pursued with 1534 each of COMPANY vendors. 1536 6.16. Respondent 16 1538 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 1539 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 1541 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 1543 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 1545 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 1546 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 1547 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 1548 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 1549 but cannot provide a number. 1551 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 - 100 1553 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 - 100 1555 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 1556 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 1557 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 1558 please select all which apply. 1560 No Response 1562 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 1563 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 1565 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: ICMP Ping, LSP Ping 1567 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448: ICMP Ping, LSP Ping 1569 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 1570 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 1572 Supported by Network/Equipment: Ethernet (Tagged Mode), Ethernet (Raw 1573 Mode) 1575 Used in Network: No Resposne 1576 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 1577 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 1578 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 1580 Using CV is not required at the moment 1582 6.17. Respondent 17 1584 2. In your network in general, across all products, please indicate 1585 which Pseudowire encapsulations your company has implemented. 1587 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 1589 SAToP - RFC 4553 1591 Frame Relay (Port Mode) - RFC 4619 1593 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 1595 ATM (N:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 1597 ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 1599 CESoPSN - RFC 5086 1601 TDMoIP - RFC 5087 1603 3. Approximately how many Pseudowires are deployed of each 1604 encapsulation type. Note, this should be the number of pseudowires 1605 in service, carrying traffic, or pre-positioned to do so. ***Note, 1606 please indicate "In-Use" for any PW Encap Types which you are using 1607 but cannot provide a number. 1609 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448 - >40k 1611 Ethernet Raw Mode - RFC 4448 - In-Use 1613 SAToP - RFC 4553 - >20k 1615 Frame Relay (Port Mode) - RFC 4619 - >5k 1617 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619 - >5k 1619 ATM (N:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 - >50k 1621 ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717 - >50k 1623 CESoPSN - RFC 5086 - >20k 1624 TDMoIP - RFC 5087 - >20k 1626 4. Please indicate which VCCV Control Channel is used for each 1627 encapsulation type. Understanding that users may have different 1628 networks with varying implementations, for your network in general, 1629 please select all which apply. 1631 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: Control Word (Type 1) 1633 SAToP - RFC 4553: Control Word (Type 1) 1635 Frame Relay (Port Mode) - RFC 4619: Control Word (Type 1) 1637 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619: Control Word (Type 1) 1639 ATM (N:1 Mode) - RFC 4717: Control Word (Type 1) 1641 ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717: Control Word (Type 1) 1643 5. Please indicate which VCCV Connectivity Verification types are 1644 used in your networks for each encapsulation type. 1646 Ethernet Tagged Mode - RFC 4448: LSP Ping 1648 SAToP - RFC 4553: LSP Ping 1650 Frame Relay (Port Mode) - RFC 4619: LSP Ping 1652 Frame Relay (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4619: LSP Ping 1654 ATM (N:1 Mode) - RFC 4717: LSP Ping 1656 ATM (1:1 Mode) - RFC 4717: LSP Ping 1658 6. Please indicate your network's support of and use of the Control 1659 Word for encapsulations for which the Control Word is optional. 1661 Supported by Network/Equipment: ATM (N:1 Cell Mode) 1663 Used in Network: No Response 1665 7. Please use this space to provide any feedback regarding PW and 1666 VCCV deployments, VCCV interoperability challenges, this survey or 1667 any network/vendor details you wish to share. 1669 BFD VCCV Control Channel is not indicated in the survey (may be 1670 required for PW redundancy purpose) 1672 7. References 1674 7.1. Normative References 1676 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 1677 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 1679 7.2. Informative References 1681 [RFC5085] Nadeau, T., Ed. and C. Pignataro, Ed., "Pseudowire Virtual 1682 Circuit Connectivity Verification (VCCV): A Control 1683 Channel for Pseudowires", December 2007. 1685 Author's Address 1687 Christopher N. "Nick" Del Regno (editor) 1688 Verizon Communications Inc 1689 400 International Pkwy 1690 Richardson, TX 75081 1691 US 1693 Email: nick.delregno@verizon.com