Mitigating the Negative Impact of Maintenance through BGP Session Culling
draft-ietf-grow-bgp-session-culling-05
Revision differences
Document history
Date | Rev. | By | Action |
---|---|---|---|
2018-02-26
|
05 | (System) | RFC Editor state changed to AUTH48-DONE from AUTH48 |
2018-02-21
|
05 | (System) | RFC Editor state changed to AUTH48 from RFC-EDITOR |
2018-01-22
|
05 | (System) | RFC Editor state changed to RFC-EDITOR from EDIT |
2018-01-12
|
05 | (System) | RFC Editor state changed to EDIT from MISSREF |
2017-11-13
|
05 | (System) | RFC Editor state changed to MISSREF from EDIT |
2017-10-23
|
05 | Gunter Van de Velde | Closed request for Last Call review by OPSDIR with state 'No Response' |
2017-10-16
|
05 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to No IC from In Progress |
2017-10-16
|
05 | (System) | RFC Editor state changed to EDIT |
2017-10-16
|
05 | (System) | IESG state changed to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent |
2017-10-16
|
05 | (System) | Announcement was received by RFC Editor |
2017-10-16
|
05 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to In Progress |
2017-10-16
|
05 | Amy Vezza | IESG state changed to Approved-announcement sent from Approved-announcement to be sent |
2017-10-16
|
05 | Amy Vezza | IESG has approved the document |
2017-10-16
|
05 | Amy Vezza | Closed "Approve" ballot |
2017-10-16
|
05 | Amy Vezza | Ballot approval text was generated |
2017-10-12
|
05 | Cindy Morgan | IESG state changed to Approved-announcement to be sent from IESG Evaluation |
2017-10-11
|
05 | Ben Campbell | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Ben Campbell |
2017-10-11
|
05 | Adam Roach | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Adam Roach |
2017-10-11
|
05 | Deborah Brungard | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Deborah Brungard |
2017-10-11
|
05 | Alvaro Retana | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Alvaro Retana |
2017-10-11
|
05 | Alvaro Retana | This document now replaces draft-iops-grow-bgp-session-culling instead of None |
2017-10-11
|
05 | Benoît Claise | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Benoit Claise |
2017-10-10
|
05 | Spencer Dawkins | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Spencer Dawkins |
2017-10-10
|
05 | Suresh Krishnan | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Suresh Krishnan |
2017-10-10
|
05 | Amanda Baber | IANA Review state changed to IANA OK - No Actions Needed from Version Changed - Review Needed |
2017-10-10
|
05 | Kathleen Moriarty | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Kathleen Moriarty |
2017-10-10
|
05 | Alissa Cooper | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Alissa Cooper |
2017-10-08
|
05 | Alexey Melnikov | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Alexey Melnikov |
2017-10-07
|
05 | Eric Rescorla | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Eric Rescorla |
2017-10-05
|
05 | Brian Carpenter | Request for Telechat review by GENART Completed: Ready. Reviewer: Brian Carpenter. Sent review to list. |
2017-10-05
|
05 | Mirja Kühlewind | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Mirja Kühlewind |
2017-10-04
|
05 | Jean Mahoney | Request for Telechat review by GENART is assigned to Brian Carpenter |
2017-10-04
|
05 | Jean Mahoney | Request for Telechat review by GENART is assigned to Brian Carpenter |
2017-09-28
|
05 | (System) | IANA Review state changed to Version Changed - Review Needed from IANA OK - No Actions Needed |
2017-09-28
|
05 | Job Snijders | New version available: draft-ietf-grow-bgp-session-culling-05.txt |
2017-09-28
|
05 | (System) | New version approved |
2017-09-28
|
05 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Matt Griswold , Nick Hilliard , Will Hargrave , Job Snijders |
2017-09-28
|
05 | Job Snijders | Uploaded new revision |
2017-09-28
|
05 | (System) | IANA Review state changed to IANA OK - No Actions Needed from Version Changed - Review Needed |
2017-09-26
|
04 | Warren Kumari | IESG state changed to IESG Evaluation from Waiting for Writeup |
2017-09-26
|
04 | Warren Kumari | Placed on agenda for telechat - 2017-10-12 |
2017-09-26
|
04 | Warren Kumari | Ballot has been issued |
2017-09-26
|
04 | Warren Kumari | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Warren Kumari |
2017-09-26
|
04 | Warren Kumari | Created "Approve" ballot |
2017-09-26
|
04 | Warren Kumari | Ballot writeup was changed |
2017-09-25
|
04 | Paul Wouters | Request for Last Call review by SECDIR Completed: Ready. Reviewer: Paul Wouters. Sent review to list. |
2017-09-25
|
04 | (System) | IESG state changed to Waiting for Writeup from In Last Call |
2017-09-22
|
04 | (System) | IANA Review state changed to IANA OK - No Actions Needed from IANA - Review Needed |
2017-09-22
|
04 | Sabrina Tanamal | (Via drafts-lastcall@iana.org): IESG/Authors/WG Chairs: The IANA Services Operator has reviewed draft-ietf-grow-bgp-session-culling-04, which is currently in Last Call, and has the following comments: We … (Via drafts-lastcall@iana.org): IESG/Authors/WG Chairs: The IANA Services Operator has reviewed draft-ietf-grow-bgp-session-culling-04, which is currently in Last Call, and has the following comments: We understand that this document doesn't require any registry actions. While it's often helpful for a document's IANA Considerations section to remain in place upon publication even if there are no actions, if the authors strongly prefer to remove it, we do not object. If this assessment is not accurate, please respond as soon as possible. Thank you, Sabrina Tanamal IANA Services Specialist |
2017-09-20
|
04 | Tero Kivinen | Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Paul Wouters |
2017-09-20
|
04 | Tero Kivinen | Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Paul Wouters |
2017-09-18
|
04 | Min Ye | Request for Last Call review by RTGDIR Completed: Has Nits. Reviewer: Stig Venaas. |
2017-09-18
|
04 | Brian Carpenter | Request for Last Call review by GENART Completed: Ready with Issues. Reviewer: Brian Carpenter. Sent review to list. |
2017-09-14
|
04 | Jean Mahoney | Request for Last Call review by GENART is assigned to Brian Carpenter |
2017-09-14
|
04 | Jean Mahoney | Request for Last Call review by GENART is assigned to Brian Carpenter |
2017-09-14
|
04 | Gunter Van de Velde | Request for Last Call review by OPSDIR is assigned to Lionel Morand |
2017-09-14
|
04 | Gunter Van de Velde | Request for Last Call review by OPSDIR is assigned to Lionel Morand |
2017-09-13
|
04 | Min Ye | Request for Last Call review by RTGDIR is assigned to Stig Venaas |
2017-09-13
|
04 | Min Ye | Request for Last Call review by RTGDIR is assigned to Stig Venaas |
2017-09-13
|
04 | Min Ye | Request for Last Call review by RTGDIR is assigned to Tomonori Takeda |
2017-09-13
|
04 | Min Ye | Request for Last Call review by RTGDIR is assigned to Tomonori Takeda |
2017-09-12
|
04 | Alvaro Retana | Requested Last Call review by RTGDIR |
2017-09-11
|
04 | Cindy Morgan | IANA Review state changed to IANA - Review Needed |
2017-09-11
|
04 | Cindy Morgan | The following Last Call announcement was sent out (ends 2017-09-25): From: The IESG To: IETF-Announce CC: grow-chairs@ietf.org, grow@ietf.org, Christopher Morrow , christopher.morrow@gmail.com, … The following Last Call announcement was sent out (ends 2017-09-25): From: The IESG To: IETF-Announce CC: grow-chairs@ietf.org, grow@ietf.org, Christopher Morrow , christopher.morrow@gmail.com, draft-ietf-grow-bgp-session-culling@ietf.org, warren@kumari.net Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org Sender: Subject: Last Call: (Mitigating Negative Impact of Maintenance through BGP Session Culling) to Best Current Practice The IESG has received a request from the Global Routing Operations WG (grow) to consider the following document: - 'Mitigating Negative Impact of Maintenance through BGP Session Culling' as Best Current Practice The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2017-09-25. Exceptionally, comments may be sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. Abstract This document outlines an approach to mitigate negative impact on networks resulting from maintenance activities. It includes guidance for both IP networks and Internet Exchange Points (IXPs). The approach is to ensure BGP-4 sessions affected by the maintenance are forcefully torn down before the actual maintenance activities commence. The file can be obtained via https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-grow-bgp-session-culling/ IESG discussion can be tracked via https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-grow-bgp-session-culling/ballot/ No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D. The document contains these normative downward references. See RFC 3967 for additional information: rfc4271: A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4) (Draft Standard - IETF stream) |
2017-09-11
|
04 | Cindy Morgan | IESG state changed to In Last Call from Last Call Requested |
2017-09-11
|
04 | Warren Kumari | Last call was requested |
2017-09-11
|
04 | Warren Kumari | Last call announcement was generated |
2017-09-11
|
04 | Warren Kumari | Ballot approval text was generated |
2017-09-11
|
04 | Warren Kumari | Ballot writeup was generated |
2017-09-11
|
04 | Warren Kumari | IESG state changed to Last Call Requested from AD Evaluation |
2017-09-11
|
04 | Job Snijders | New version available: draft-ietf-grow-bgp-session-culling-04.txt |
2017-09-11
|
04 | (System) | New version approved |
2017-09-11
|
04 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Matt Griswold , Job Snijders , Will Hargrave , Nick Hilliard |
2017-09-11
|
04 | Job Snijders | Uploaded new revision |
2017-09-09
|
03 | Warren Kumari | IESG state changed to AD Evaluation from Publication Requested |
2017-09-06
|
03 | Chris Morrow | As required by RFC 4858, this is the current template for the Document Shepherd Write-Up. Changes are expected over time. This version is dated … As required by RFC 4858, this is the current template for the Document Shepherd Write-Up. Changes are expected over time. This version is dated 24 February 2012. (1) What type of RFC is being requested (BCP, Proposed Standard, Internet Standard, Informational, Experimental, or Historic)? Why is this the proper type of RFC? Is this type of RFC indicated in the title page header? BCP (2) 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 This document outlines an approach to mitigate negative impact on networks resulting from maintenance activities. It includes guidance for both IP networks and Internet Exchange Points (IXPs). The approach is to ensure BGP-4 sessions affected by the maintenance are forcefully torn down before the actual maintenance activities commence. Working Group Summary Was there anything in WG process that is worth noting? For example, was there controversy about particular points or were there decisions where the consensus was particularly rough? Nothing of note in the WG process. Document Quality Are there existing implementations of the protocol? Have a significant number of vendors indicated their plan to implement the specification? Are there any reviewers that merit special mention as having done a thorough review, e.g., one that resulted in important changes or a conclusion that the document had no substantive issues? If there was a MIB Doctor, Media Type or other expert review, what was its course (briefly)? In the case of a Media Type review, on what date was the request posted? The document is in good shape, it's proposing operations actions and milestones to complete said actions. Personnel Who is the Document Shepherd? Who is the Responsible Area Director? Shepherd: chris morrow (christopher.morrow@gmail.com) ResponsibleAD: warren kumari (warren@kumari.net) (3) Briefly describe the review of this document that was performed by the Document Shepherd. If this version of the document is not ready for publication, please explain why the document is being forwarded to the IESG. The document was reviewed by the shepherd several times in it's lifecycle, as well as by various operations folk in the working group. (4) Does the document Shepherd have any concerns about the depth or breadth of the reviews that have been performed? no concerns, thanks. (5) Do portions of the document need review from a particular or from broader perspective, e.g., security, operational complexity, AAA, DNS, DHCP, XML, or internationalization? If so, describe the review that took place. no expert review necessary. (6) Describe any specific concerns or issues that the Document Shepherd has 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. (7) Has each author confirmed that any and all appropriate IPR disclosures required for full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79 have already been filed. If not, explain why. yes, no IPR claims are outstanding or made. (8) Has an IPR disclosure been filed that references this document? If so, summarize any WG discussion and conclusion regarding the IPR disclosures. NO IPR DISCLOSURES (9) 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? The WG has as solid a consensus behind this document as happens in GROW. (10) 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 publicly available.) no appeal threats. (11) Identify any ID nits the Document Shepherd has found in this document. (See https://www.ietf.org/tools/idnits/ and the Internet-Drafts Checklist). Boilerplate checks are not enough; this check needs to be thorough. Nits include 1 outdated ID reference (increment necessary) 1 outdated ID->RFC transition these will be fixed up in auth48. (12) Describe how the document meets any required formal review criteria, such as the MIB Doctor, media type, and URI type reviews. no formal review is required. (13) Have all references within this document been identified as either normative or informative? yes (14) 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 plan for their completion? no.. though we may get luck and meet the timelines for gshut to be RFC not ID :) (15) Are there downward normative references references (see RFC 3967)? If so, list these downward references to support the Area Director in the Last Call procedure. no (16) Will publication of this document change the status of any existing RFCs? Are those RFCs listed on the title page header, listed in the abstract, and discussed in the introduction? If the RFCs are not listed in the Abstract and Introduction, explain why, and point to the part of the document where the relationship of this document to the other RFCs is discussed. If this information is not in the document, explain why the WG considers it unnecessary. no (17) Describe the Document Shepherd's review of the IANA considerations section, especially with regard to its consistency with the body of the document. Confirm that all protocol extensions that the document makes are associated with the appropriate reservations in IANA registries. Confirm that any referenced IANA registries have been clearly identified. Confirm that newly created IANA registries include a detailed specification of the initial contents for the registry, that allocations procedures for future registrations are defined, and a reasonable name for the new registry has been suggested (see RFC 5226). no actions stand for IANA (18) List any new IANA registries that require Expert Review for future allocations. Provide any public guidance that the IESG would find useful in selecting the IANA Experts for these new registries. no (19) Describe reviews and automated checks performed by the Document Shepherd to validate sections of the document written in a formal language, such as XML code, BNF rules, MIB definitions, etc. no automated reviews necessary |
2017-09-06
|
03 | Chris Morrow | Responsible AD changed to Warren Kumari |
2017-09-06
|
03 | Chris Morrow | IETF WG state changed to Submitted to IESG for Publication from In WG Last Call |
2017-09-06
|
03 | Chris Morrow | IESG state changed to Publication Requested |
2017-09-06
|
03 | Chris Morrow | IESG process started in state Publication Requested |
2017-09-06
|
03 | Chris Morrow | Changed document writeup |
2017-09-06
|
03 | Chris Morrow | Notification list changed to Christopher Morrow <christopher.morrow@gmail.com> |
2017-09-06
|
03 | Chris Morrow | Document shepherd changed to Christopher Morrow |
2017-09-06
|
03 | Chris Morrow | Changed consensus to Yes from Unknown |
2017-09-06
|
03 | Chris Morrow | Intended Status changed to Best Current Practice from None |
2017-08-19
|
03 | Job Snijders | New version available: draft-ietf-grow-bgp-session-culling-03.txt |
2017-08-19
|
03 | (System) | New version approved |
2017-08-19
|
03 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Matt Griswold , Job Snijders , Will Hargrave , Nick Hilliard |
2017-08-19
|
03 | Job Snijders | Uploaded new revision |
2017-07-24
|
02 | Peter Schoenmaker | Working group last call will last 3 weeks ending August 11th, 2017 |
2017-07-24
|
02 | Peter Schoenmaker | IETF WG state changed to In WG Last Call from WG Document |
2017-07-13
|
02 | Peter Schoenmaker | Added to session: IETF-99: grow Mon-1740 |
2017-07-03
|
02 | Job Snijders | New version available: draft-ietf-grow-bgp-session-culling-02.txt |
2017-07-03
|
02 | (System) | New version approved |
2017-07-03
|
02 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Matt Griswold , Job Snijders , Will Hargrave , Nick Hilliard |
2017-07-03
|
02 | Job Snijders | Uploaded new revision |
2017-04-06
|
01 | Job Snijders | New version available: draft-ietf-grow-bgp-session-culling-01.txt |
2017-04-06
|
01 | (System) | New version approved |
2017-04-06
|
01 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Matt Griswold , Job Snijders , Will Hargrave , Nick Hilliard |
2017-04-06
|
01 | Job Snijders | Uploaded new revision |
2017-04-06
|
00 | Job Snijders | New version available: draft-ietf-grow-bgp-session-culling-00.txt |
2017-04-06
|
00 | (System) | WG -00 approved |
2017-04-06
|
00 | Job Snijders | Set submitter to "Job Snijders ", replaces to (none) and sent approval email to group chairs: grow-chairs@ietf.org |
2017-04-06
|
00 | Job Snijders | Uploaded new revision |