RE: Work on MPLS and tunneling approaches in scenarios

["Francois Le Faucheur (flefauch)" <flefauch@cisco.com>]

Hello Pekka,

>> For those not attending, the slides of the presentation are
>> temporarily available at:
>> 
http:/www.netcore.fi/pekkas/ietf/temp/v6ops-mpls.pdf
http:/www.netcore.fi/pekkas/ietf/temp/v6ops-tunneling.pdf

Your slides said:
"bgp-tunnel relationship to Cisco 6PE is unclear"

"bgp-tunnel" is generic and specifies several flavors of how to
interconnect IPv6 island over an IPv4 cloud with BGP (eg. "MP-BGP over
IPv4"  as well as "MP-BGP over IPv6" , eg. "Tunneling over IPv4/GRE
tunnels" as well as "Tunneling over MPLS LSPs").

Cisco 6PE implements one specific flavor of "bgp-tunnel" (eg. "MP-BGP
over IPv4" using "Tunneling over MPLS LSPs"). It is compliant to the
specification of that flavor in "bgp-tunnel".

Let me know if anything is still unclear.


Your slides said:
"some think bgp-tunnel has some cruft in it and would need a cleanup"

Because it specifies something for which there are multiple commercial
implementations and multiple deployments in the field, the authors of
bgp-tunnel have been trying very hard to get a WG home for this document
in order to get feed-back on how to clean it up and finalise it. But the
IETF decision was to hold onto that until the isp-scenario-analysis work
is complete and identifies bgp-tunnel as a useful mechanism. 
I understand that we will be able to discuss/progress bgp-tunnel in IETF
(v6ops?) as soon as the isp-scenario-analysis document is completed. Do
I understand the situation correctly?

In the meantime, I'd like to invite folks who have identified cruft in
bgp-tunnel to send comments on the list so we can start the potential
cleanup process.

Thanks

Francois