This is very useful — thank you, Matthew! > On Jun 4, 2025, at 7:49 AM, Matthew Bocci (Nokia) > <[email protected]> wrote: > > I don’t think it means the QoS treatment *must* always be the same between > VCCV and user data on a given PW. For example, there are cases such as > VCCV-BFD where you are doing a continuity check that should not be affected > by short bursts of congestion that might affect the user packets (which would > be measured by some other OAM such as PM) but must nonetheless follow the > same PW. >
Carlos.
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
