Question on Administratively down bit

[Akira NAGATA <nagata.akira@jp.fujitsu.com>]

Mr. Lou Berger and editors of RFC3471 and RFC3473,

This is my first time to send e-mail to ccamp.
Thanks in advance.

I'd like to ask one question about the handling of Administratively down bit
in GMPLS RSVP-TE's Admin_Status object.

RFC3471 introduces "inhibiting alarm reporting" as an example application 
of local action to "down" state (that is, A-bit=1) in Section 8.
But I can't find any other explicit descriptions about this procedure
in RFC3471 or 3473.

I understand that actions to be taken by each node receiving Admin_Status
object shall be based on local policy.

With regard to inhibition of alarm reporting, however, in order to achieve it
through end-to-end, I believe that we had better take a unified action
as a response to A-bit ("down" or "up").
Operator will expect this feature.

(Here I mean alarm report is not reporting via RSVP messages as described
in ID-alarm-spec, but one from NE to external system such as network
management system.)

Are there any considerations, drafts or RFCs to define it?

Thanks,
---
Akira NAGATA <nagata.akira@jp.fujitsu.com>