Label Switched Path Stitching with Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching Traffic Engineering (GMPLS TE)
draft-ietf-ccamp-lsp-stitching-06
Revision differences
Document history
Date | Rev. | By | Action |
---|---|---|---|
2012-08-22
|
06 | (System) | post-migration administrative database adjustment to the No Record position for Lisa Dusseault |
2007-08-30
|
06 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to RFC-Ed-Ack from Waiting on RFC Editor |
2007-08-30
|
06 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to Waiting on RFC Editor from In Progress |
2007-08-30
|
06 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to In Progress from Waiting on Authors |
2007-08-29
|
06 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to Waiting on Authors from In Progress |
2007-08-28
|
06 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to In Progress |
2007-08-28
|
06 | Amy Vezza | State Changes to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent by Amy Vezza |
2007-08-27
|
06 | Amy Vezza | IESG state changed to Approved-announcement sent |
2007-08-27
|
06 | Amy Vezza | IESG has approved the document |
2007-08-27
|
06 | Amy Vezza | Closed "Approve" ballot |
2007-08-24
|
06 | (System) | Removed from agenda for telechat - 2007-08-23 |
2007-08-23
|
06 | Amy Vezza | State Changes to Approved-announcement to be sent from IESG Evaluation by Amy Vezza |
2007-08-23
|
06 | Amy Vezza | State Changes to IESG Evaluation from Waiting for AD Go-Ahead by Amy Vezza |
2007-08-23
|
06 | Lisa Dusseault | [Ballot Position Update] Position for Lisa Dusseault has been changed to Undefined from Discuss by Lisa Dusseault |
2007-08-23
|
06 | David Ward | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded by David Ward |
2007-08-23
|
06 | Dan Romascanu | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Dan Romascanu |
2007-08-23
|
06 | Chris Newman | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Chris Newman |
2007-08-23
|
06 | Jon Peterson | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Jon Peterson |
2007-08-22
|
06 | Ron Bonica | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Ron Bonica |
2007-08-22
|
06 | Lars Eggert | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Lars Eggert |
2007-08-21
|
06 | Lisa Dusseault | [Ballot discuss] How does defining LSP stitching fall into the CCAMP charter? (Conversely, if that falls into the charter, what vaguely-related-to-MPLS work wouldn't be in … [Ballot discuss] How does defining LSP stitching fall into the CCAMP charter? (Conversely, if that falls into the charter, what vaguely-related-to-MPLS work wouldn't be in charter?) |
2007-08-21
|
06 | Lisa Dusseault | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded by Lisa Dusseault |
2007-08-21
|
06 | Jari Arkko | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Jari Arkko |
2007-08-16
|
06 | (System) | State has been changed to Waiting for AD Go-Ahead from In Last Call by system |
2007-08-16
|
06 | Cullen Jennings | Placed on agenda for telechat - 2007-08-23 by Cullen Jennings |
2007-08-16
|
06 | Tim Polk | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Tim Polk |
2007-08-16
|
06 | Cullen Jennings | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Cullen Jennings |
2007-08-16
|
06 | Ron Bonica | Removed from agenda for telechat - 2007-08-23 by Ron Bonica |
2007-08-16
|
06 | Russ Housley | [Ballot comment] From the Gen-ART Review by Francis Dupont Comments: there are only some editorial comments, i.e., things which should be handled by … [Ballot comment] From the Gen-ART Review by Francis Dupont Comments: there are only some editorial comments, i.e., things which should be handled by the RFC editor: - abstract page 2: from from -> from - TOC page 3: for LSP_ATTRIBUTES Object -> for the ...? - 2 page 5: are required -> are required to - 5.1 page 8: LSP ([RFC3473]), to -> LSP ([RFC3473]) to - 5.1.1 page 8: some other e2e LSP. -> some other e2e LSPs.? - 5.1.1 page 8: in the Resv, -> in the Resv message, - 5.1.1.1 page 9: in the Resv Label. -> in the Resv message.? - 5.1.2 page 10: bandwidth, local TE -> bandwidth or local TE - 5.1.2 page 11: a Path Msg -> a Path message - 5.1.2 page 11: a PathErr with the error codes -> a PathErr message with the error code? - 5.1.3 page 11: I can't parse this sentence (commas?): An e2e LSP traversing an S-LSP, SHOULD record in the RRO for that hop, an identifier corresponding to the S-LSP TE link. - 5.2.3 page 14: PCE -> Path Computation Element - 10 page 18: please add ", USA" after ZIP codes. |
2007-08-16
|
06 | Russ Housley | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Russ Housley |
2007-08-14
|
06 | Yoshiko Fong | IANA Last Call Comment: **NOTE*** action #3 it is trying to register values already allocated. Is the value can be the next available number? ******** … IANA Last Call Comment: **NOTE*** action #3 it is trying to register values already allocated. Is the value can be the next available number? ******** Action #1: Section 7.1 Upon approval of this document, the IANA will make the following assignments in the "RSVP TE Parameters - per [RFC4420]" registry located at http://www.iana.org/assignments/rsvp-te-parameters sub-registry "Attributes Flags - per [RFC4420]" Bit Name Attribute Attribute RRO Reference Flags Path Flags Resv ---+-------------------------+---------+----------+----+----------------- 5 + LSP stitching desired + Yes + No + Yes+ [RFC-ccamp-lsp-stitching-06] Action #2: Section 7.2 Upon approval of this document, the IANA will make the following assignments in the "RSVP Parameters" registry located at http://www.iana.org/assignments/rsvp-parameters sub-registry "Error Codes and Values" Error code 24 (Policy control failure) The document is requesting the following value 23, but 23 is already registered TDB = Stitching unsupported [RFC-ccamp-lsp-stitching-06] We understand the above to be the only IANA Actions for this document. |
2007-08-02
|
06 | Samuel Weiler | Request for Telechat review by SECDIR is assigned to Juergen Quittek |
2007-08-02
|
06 | Samuel Weiler | Request for Telechat review by SECDIR is assigned to Juergen Quittek |
2007-08-02
|
06 | Amy Vezza | Last call sent |
2007-08-02
|
06 | Amy Vezza | State Changes to In Last Call from Last Call Requested by Amy Vezza |
2007-08-01
|
06 | Ross Callon | Placed on agenda for telechat - 2007-08-23 by Ross Callon |
2007-08-01
|
06 | Ross Callon | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Ross Callon |
2007-08-01
|
06 | Ross Callon | Ballot has been issued by Ross Callon |
2007-08-01
|
06 | Ross Callon | Created "Approve" ballot |
2007-08-01
|
06 | Ross Callon | Last Call was requested by Ross Callon |
2007-08-01
|
06 | Ross Callon | State Changes to Last Call Requested from AD Evaluation by Ross Callon |
2007-08-01
|
06 | (System) | Ballot writeup text was added |
2007-08-01
|
06 | (System) | Last call text was added |
2007-08-01
|
06 | (System) | Ballot approval text was added |
2007-06-15
|
06 | Ross Callon | State Changes to AD Evaluation from Publication Requested by Ross Callon |
2007-04-30
|
06 | Ross Callon | Intended Status has been changed to Proposed Standard from None |
2007-04-30
|
06 | Ross Callon | Proto writeup by Deborah Brungard: (1.a) Who is the Document Shepherd for this document? Deborah Brungard (dbrungard@att.com) … Proto writeup by Deborah Brungard: (1.a) Who is the Document Shepherd for this document? Deborah Brungard (dbrungard@att.com) Has the Document Shepherd personally reviewed this version of the document and, in particular, does he or she believe this version is ready for forwarding to the IESG for publication? Yes (1.b) Has the document had adequate review both from key WG members and from key non-WG members? Yes Does the Document Shepherd have any concerns about the depth or breadth of the reviews that have been performed? No concerns. (1.c) Does the Document Shepherd have concerns that the document needs more review from a particular or broader perspective, e.g., security, operational complexity, someone familiar with AAA, internationalization or XML? No concerns. (1.d) Does the Document Shepherd have any specific concerns or issues with this document that the Responsible Area Director and/or the IESG should be aware of? For example, perhaps he or she is uncomfortable with certain parts of the document, or has concerns whether there really is a need for it. In any event, if the WG has discussed those issues and has indicated that it still wishes to advance the document, detail those concerns here. No concerns. Has an IPR disclosure related to this document been filed? If so, please include a reference to the disclosure and summarize the WG discussion and conclusion on this issue. None have been filed. (1.e) How solid is the WG consensus behind this document? Does it represent the strong concurrence of a few individuals, with others being silent, or does the WG as a whole understand and agree with it? WG agrees. (1.f) Has anyone threatened an appeal or otherwise indicated extreme discontent? If so, please summarise the areas of conflict in separate email messages to the Responsible Area Director. (It should be in a separate email because this questionnaire is entered into the ID Tracker.) No. (1.g) Has the Document Shepherd personally verified that the document satisfies all ID nits? (See http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html and http://tools.ietf.org/tools/idnits/). Boilerplate checks are not enough; this check needs to be thorough. Satisfies. Has the document met all formal review criteria it needs to, such as the MIB Doctor, media type and URI type reviews? Yes. (1.h) Has the document split its references into normative and informative? Yes. Are there normative references to documents that are not ready for advancement or are otherwise in an unclear state? If such normative references exist, what is the strategy for their completion? None. Are there normative references that are downward references, as described in [RFC3967]? If so, list these downward references to support the Area Director in the Last Call procedure for them [RFC3967]. No. (1.i) Has the Document Shepherd verified that the document IANA consideration section exists and is consistent with the body of the document? If the document specifies protocol extensions, are reservations requested in appropriate IANA registries? Are the IANA registries clearly identified? If the document creates a new registry, does it define the proposed initial contents of the registry and an allocation procedure for future registrations? Does it suggest a reasonable name for the new registry? See [RFC2434]. Yes to all above. If the document describes an Expert Review process has Shepherd conferred with the Responsible Area Director so that the IESG can appoint the needed Expert during the IESG Evaluation? None required. (1.j) Has the Document Shepherd verified that sections of the document that are written in a formal language, such as XML code, BNF rules, MIB definitions, etc., validate correctly in an automated checker? Not applicable. (1.k) The IESG approval announcement includes a Document Announcement Write-Up. Please provide such a Document Announcement Write-Up? Recent examples can be found in the "Action" announcements for approved documents. The approval announcement contains the following sections: Technical Summary In certain scenarios, there may be a need to combine together several Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) such that a single end-to-end (e2e) LSP is realized and all traffic from one constituent LSP is switched onto the next LSP. We will refer to this as "LSP stitching", the key requirement being that a constituent LSP not be allocated to more than one e2e LSP. The constituent LSPs will be referred to as "LSP segments" (S-LSPs). This document describes extensions to the existing GMPLS signaling protocol (RSVP-TE) to establish e2e LSPs created from from S-LSPs, and describes how the LSPs can be managed using the GMPLS signaling and routing protocols. Working Group Summary The Working Group had consensus on this document. Document Quality This document has been implemented. Personnel Who is the Document Shepherd for this document? Deborah Brungard Who is the Responsible Area Director(s)Ross Callon Is an IANA expert needed? No. |
2007-04-30
|
06 | Ross Callon | Draft Added by Ross Callon in state Publication Requested |
2007-04-23
|
06 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-ccamp-lsp-stitching-06.txt |
2007-03-01
|
05 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-ccamp-lsp-stitching-05.txt |
2006-12-04
|
04 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-ccamp-lsp-stitching-04.txt |
2006-03-06
|
03 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-ccamp-lsp-stitching-03.txt |
2005-09-23
|
02 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-ccamp-lsp-stitching-02.txt |
2005-07-15
|
01 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-ccamp-lsp-stitching-01.txt |
2005-04-01
|
00 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-ccamp-lsp-stitching-00.txt |