Working group,
this is to initiate a 2 weeks working group last call on
<>
The CCAMP working is copied on this MPLS working group last,
since there are interdependencies between specifications from
both working groups. Pleae use the MPLS mailing list for
comments, cross-publishing is not necessary.
Background: This draft was reviewed by the IESG and approved
for publication. During implementation there were some issues
found and it was decided to pull the draft from the RFC Editors
queue. This wg last call is limited to these issues and how
they been addressed only.
The list of issues and how the authors has addresed has been
sent to the mailing list(s). That text is also included in this
mail.
For the record please note that I've asked the authors to
update some ID-nits, those are not part of the wg last call.
But has been included just to make it easier to progress the
document through IESG review.
This working group last call ends on EOB December 10 PST.
/Loa
------- issues and how they been addressed -------------
Here is the summary:
draft-ietf-mpls-bundle-05.txt has been updated to reflect
the comments made in the MPLS WG and on the list. The issues
raised are:
1. Scope of component identifiers is open to interpretation
(i.e., node vs link)
2. No way to specify different upstream and downstream components
then using TLV types 1, 2 and 3
3. Ambiguity of contents of the IP address field in TLV types 3, 4, 5
4. Lack of IPv6 support for types 3, 4, and 5.
5. Ambiguity of when to use types 4 and 5 and when to use type 3.
6. No coverage of ERO and RRO implications
These issues have been addressed in the following ways:
Issue 1: The -05 document states that all component link TLV types
have Node/IP scope
Issue 2: -05 Tightly defines support for different components in each
direction (for bidirectional LSPs, and for all TLV types)
Issue 3: Format of the Value field for types 3, 4 and 5 now has the
identical format as the contents of the C-Type 1
LSP_TUNNEL_INTERFACE_ID object defined in [RFC3477].
Issue 4: Based on the previous change, support of IPv6 unnumbered
components is now tied to, and the same as, the support of
IPv6 unnumber TE links.
Issue 5: -05 allows, but recommend against use of types 4 and 5
Issue 6: EROs, RROs remain out of scope of bundling document
Current planned changes are:
- Fix nits found by Adrian and Loa
- Insert a Table of Contents
- Section numbering will remain unchanged so as not to break
any potentially existing references to the draft
Yakov.
-------------------- end of included text --------------------
Loa Andersson
Principal Networking Architect
Acreo AB phone: +46 8 632 77 14
Isafjordsgatan 22 mobile: +46 739 81 21 64
Kista, Sweden email: loa.andersson@acreo.se
loa@pi.se