Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

RE: [EFM] OAM - Faye's seven points


Thank you for the response.  Please see my comments
embedded in <FL> below:

>> 4. Connectivity diagnose (ping etc) - This is divided into link
>> connectivity which
>> can be covered by 2 and subscriber line connectivity.

>Mandatory for the link, up to a point as close to the subscriber
>as possible e.g. copper loop back on the connector side of the IC, in
>last output stage of the IC (most PHY ICs support this already).

>Tests to the subscriber equipment are outside of the scope of EFM, but
>real terms the service provider will probably PING something on the
>subscriber network, given access rights.

<FL> Very good point.  I always thought what they need is
ping-ing from subscriber side to the upstream router to
test the connectivity.  Not the other way around.
So when subscriber calls and complains about a problem
with his/her connectivity, I guess you need to:

1. First find out from your network map to see if you
have gotten a report somewhere stating a box fault or
line card fault.  Either one is in the way of this
subscriber.  You also validate this by ping-ing the
CPE from the head-end?  

2. If 1 is not true, you ping the subscriber's PC or
CPE port from the router?  Note that the requirements
on the OAM is quite different from having to be able
to ping from the CPE port to the router.  The later
requires the CPE to accept such a 'ping' request
from the NOC.

Your thoughts?