Skip to main content

IS-IS Extensions for Traffic Engineering
draft-ietf-isis-te-bis-00

Revision differences

Document history

Date Rev. By Action
2015-10-14
00 (System) Notify list changed from isis-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-isis-te-bis@ietf.org, tony.li@tony.li to tony.li@tony.li
2012-08-22
00 (System) post-migration administrative database adjustment to the No Objection position for Tim Polk
2012-08-22
00 (System) post-migration administrative database adjustment to the No Objection position for Lars Eggert
2008-10-06
00 Amy Vezza State Changes to RFC Published from RFC Ed Queue by Amy Vezza
2008-10-06
00 Amy Vezza [Note]: 'RFC 5305' added by Amy Vezza
2008-10-03
00 (System) RFC published
2008-07-24
00 (System) IANA Action state changed to RFC-Ed-Ack from Waiting on RFC Editor
2008-07-24
00 (System) IANA Action state changed to Waiting on RFC Editor from In Progress
2008-07-24
00 (System) IANA Action state changed to In Progress from Waiting on Authors
2008-07-23
00 Amy Vezza State Changes to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent by Amy Vezza
2008-07-22
00 (System) IANA Action state changed to Waiting on Authors from In Progress
2008-07-22
00 (System) IANA Action state changed to In Progress
2008-07-22
00 Amy Vezza IESG state changed to Approved-announcement sent
2008-07-22
00 Amy Vezza IESG has approved the document
2008-07-22
00 Amy Vezza Closed "Approve" ballot
2008-07-22
00 Ross Callon State Changes to Approved-announcement to be sent from IESG Evaluation::AD Followup by Ross Callon
2008-07-16
00 Lars Eggert [Ballot Position Update] Position for Lars Eggert has been changed to No Objection from Discuss by Lars Eggert
2008-07-16
00 Tim Polk [Ballot Position Update] Position for Tim Polk has been changed to No Objection from Discuss by Tim Polk
2008-07-04
00 (System) Removed from agenda for telechat - 2008-07-03
2008-07-03
00 Cindy Morgan State Changes to IESG Evaluation::AD Followup from IESG Evaluation by Cindy Morgan
2008-07-03
00 Pasi Eronen [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Pasi Eronen
2008-07-03
00 Mark Townsley [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Mark Townsley
2008-07-03
00 Magnus Westerlund [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Magnus Westerlund
2008-07-03
00 Tim Polk
[Ballot discuss]
While this draft does not create any new security considerations, we need to provide readers
with a reference that describes the generic is-is …
[Ballot discuss]
While this draft does not create any new security considerations, we need to provide readers
with a reference that describes the generic is-is security considerations.  [3567bis] would seem
to be the best choice.  This could reasonably be cleared with the following RFC Editor Note:


--- draft RFC Editor Note ----

(1) Please make the following substitution in section 5:

OLD

  This document raises no new security issues for IS-IS.

NEW

  This document raises no new security issues for IS-IS; for
  general security considerations for IS-IS see [RFC3567bis].

(2) In the Section 8.2, please insert the following reference:

[RFC3567bis]  Li, T. and R. Atkinson, "Intermediate System to
              Intermediate System (IS-IS) Cryptographic Authentication",
              work in progress.
2008-07-03
00 Tim Polk [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded by Tim Polk
2008-07-03
00 Dan Romascanu
[Ballot comment]
I do not intent to block the publication of this document or of the whole set of is-is documents as PS, but I …
[Ballot comment]
I do not intent to block the publication of this document or of the whole set of is-is documents as PS, but I would like to raise the issue of the manageability and operational considerations.

>  Mechanisms and procedures to migrate to the new TLVs are not
  discussed in this document.

Where are they discussed? What is the operational impact of the migration on existing networks?

Also, what changes from a manageability point of view. Does the IS-IS MIB published as RFC4444 already cover the functionality described in the series of I-Ds that we are now migrating from Experimental to PS, or does it need an update? Or maybe some other new management interfaces need to be introduced?
2008-07-03
00 Dan Romascanu [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Dan Romascanu
2008-07-03
00 Jon Peterson [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Jon Peterson
2008-07-02
00 Chris Newman [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Chris Newman
2008-07-02
00 David Ward
[Ballot comment]
ISIS has an IPv6 draft for the base proto and a V6-TE draft. V6 in ISIS is widely developed and deployed on the …
[Ballot comment]
ISIS has an IPv6 draft for the base proto and a V6-TE draft. V6 in ISIS is widely developed and deployed on the internet
2008-07-02
00 David Ward [Ballot Position Update] New position, Recuse, has been recorded by David Ward
2008-07-02
00 Lisa Dusseault [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Lisa Dusseault
2008-07-02
00 Ron Bonica [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded by Ron Bonica
2008-07-02
00 Lars Eggert [Ballot discuss]
Reference to RFC2966 needs to be changed to cite the respective -bis document, otherwise it's a DOWNREF.
2008-07-02
00 Lars Eggert [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded by Lars Eggert
2008-07-01
00 Ross Callon [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Ross Callon
2008-07-01
00 Ross Callon Ballot has been issued by Ross Callon
2008-06-30
00 Jari Arkko
[Ballot comment]
I support the publication of this spec as PS. I reviewed the diffs to
RFC 3784 and they seemed correct. I did have …
[Ballot comment]
I support the publication of this spec as PS. I reviewed the diffs to
RFC 3784 and they seemed correct. I did have a few questions and
observations though:

1. I didn't understand the difference in use for Interface IP address
and Neighbor IP address options. Is some additional guidance needed
here? But this is the first IS-IS document that I read, its possible
that the answer is in some other documents :-)

2. For my education, what is the state of IPv6 support in IS-IS?

3. In the document header, there is confusing linewrap on "Working Group".

4. The first author's contact information needs an update. I changed the tracker to include him explicitly.
2008-06-30
00 Jari Arkko State Change Notice email list have been change to isis-chairs@tools.ietf.org, draft-ietf-isis-te-bis@tools.ietf.org, tony.li@tony.li from isis-chairs@tools.ietf.org, draft-ietf-isis-te-bis@tools.ietf.org
2008-06-30
00 Jari Arkko
[Ballot comment]
I support the publication of this spec as PS. I reviewed the diffs to
RFC 3784 and they seemed correct. I did have …
[Ballot comment]
I support the publication of this spec as PS. I reviewed the diffs to
RFC 3784 and they seemed correct. I did have a few questions and
observations though:

1. I didn't understand the difference in use for Interface IP address
and Neighbor IP address options. Is some additional guidance needed
here? But this is the first IS-IS document that I read, its possible
that the answer is in some other documents :-)

2. For my education, what is the state of IPv6 support in IS-IS?

3. In the document header, there is confusing linewrap on "Working Group".

4. The first author's contact information needs an update.
2008-06-30
00 Jari Arkko [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Jari Arkko
2008-06-30
00 Jari Arkko Created "Approve" ballot
2008-06-26
00 Ross Callon State Changes to IESG Evaluation from Waiting for AD Go-Ahead by Ross Callon
2008-06-26
00 Ross Callon Placed on agenda for telechat - 2008-07-03 by Ross Callon
2008-06-23
00 (System) State has been changed to Waiting for AD Go-Ahead from In Last Call by system
2008-06-18
00 Amanda Baber
IANA Last Call comments:

Action 1:

Upon approval of this document, the IANA will make the following
changes in the "IS-IS TLV Codepoints per [ …
IANA Last Call comments:

Action 1:

Upon approval of this document, the IANA will make the following
changes in the "IS-IS TLV Codepoints per [RFC3563]" registry at
http://www.iana.org/assignments/isis-tlv-codepoints
sub-registry "TLV Codepoints Registry"

OLD:

Name                                  Value IIH LSP SNP Status/Reference
------------------------------------- ----- --- --- --- ----------------
The extended IS reachability TLV      22    n  y  n  [RFC3784]
...
The Traffic Engineering router ID TLV 134  n  y  n  [RFC3784]
The extended IP reachability TLV      135  n  y  n  [RFC3784]


NEW:

Name                                  Value IIH LSP SNP Status/Reference
------------------------------------- ----- --- --- --- ----------------
The extended IS reachability TLV      22    n  y  n
[RFC3784][RFC-isis-te-bis-00]
...
The Traffic Engineering router ID TLV 134  n  y  n
[RFC3784][RFC-isis-te-bis-00]
The extended IP reachability TLV      135  n  y  n
[RFC3784][RFC-isis-te-bis-00]


Action 2:

Upon approval of this document, the IANA will make the following
changes in the "IS-IS TLV Codepoints per [RFC3563]" registry at
http://www.iana.org/assignments/isis-tlv-codepoints
sub-registry "Sub-TLVs for TLV 22"


OLD:

Reference: [RFC3784]

Type Description                  Reference
---- ----------------------------- ---------
0    Unassigned
1    Unassigned
2    Unassigned
3    Administrative group (color)  [RFC3784]
4    Link Local/Remote Identifiers [RFC4205]
5    Unassigned
6    IPv4 interface address        [RFC3784]
7    Unassigned
8    IPv4 neighbor address        [RFC3784]
9    Maximum link bandwidth        [RFC3784]
10  Reservable link bandwidth    [RFC3784]
11  Unreserved bandwidth          [RFC3784]
12  Unassigned
13  Unassigned
14  Unassigned
15  Unassigned
16  Unassigned
17  Unassigned
18  TE Default metric            [RFC3784]

NEW:

Reference: [RFC3784][RFC-isis-te-bis-00]

Type Description                  Reference
---- ----------------------------- ---------
0    Unassigned
1    Unassigned
2    Unassigned
3    Administrative group (color)  [RFC3784][RFC-isis-te-bis-00]
4    Link Local/Remote Identifiers [RFC4205]
5    Unassigned
6    IPv4 interface address        [RFC3784][RFC-isis-te-bis-00]
7    Unassigned
8    IPv4 neighbor address        [RFC3784][RFC-isis-te-bis-00]
9    Maximum link bandwidth        [RFC3784][RFC-isis-te-bis-00]
10  Reservable link bandwidth    [RFC3784][RFC-isis-te-bis-00]
11  Unreserved bandwidth          [RFC3784][RFC-isis-te-bis-00]
12  Unassigned
13  Unassigned
14  Unassigned
15  Unassigned
16  Unassigned
17  Unassigned
18  TE Default metric            [RFC3784][RFC-isis-te-bis-00]


Action 3:

Upon approval of this document, the IANA will make the following
changes in the "IS-IS TLV Codepoints per [RFC3563]" registry at
http://www.iana.org/assignments/isis-tlv-codepoints
sub-registry "Sub-TLVs for TLV 135"


OLD:

Reference: [RFC3784]

NEW:

Reference: [RFC3784][RFC-isis-te-bis-00]


We understand the above to be the only IANA Actions for this document.
2008-06-09
00 Cindy Morgan Last call sent
2008-06-09
00 Cindy Morgan State Changes to In Last Call from Last Call Requested by Cindy Morgan
2008-06-09
00 Ross Callon State Changes to Last Call Requested from IESG Evaluation by Ross Callon
2008-06-09
00 Ross Callon Last Call was requested by Ross Callon
2008-06-09
00 (System) Ballot writeup text was added
2008-06-09
00 (System) Last call text was added
2008-06-09
00 (System) Ballot approval text was added
2008-06-09
00 Ross Callon Removed from agenda for telechat - 2008-06-19 by Ross Callon
2008-06-03
00 Ross Callon Placed on agenda for telechat - 2008-06-19 by Ross Callon
2008-06-03
00 Ross Callon State Changes to IESG Evaluation from Publication Requested::External Party by Ross Callon
2008-04-09
00 Ross Callon Draft Added by Ross Callon in state Publication Requested
2005-09-06
00 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-isis-te-bis-00.txt