Signal-Free Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) Multicast
draft-ietf-lisp-signal-free-multicast-09
Revision differences
Document history
Date | Rev. | By | Action |
---|---|---|---|
2018-05-02
|
09 | (System) | RFC Editor state changed to AUTH48-DONE from AUTH48 |
2018-04-23
|
09 | (System) | RFC Editor state changed to AUTH48 from RFC-EDITOR |
2018-04-13
|
09 | (System) | RFC Editor state changed to RFC-EDITOR from EDIT |
2018-03-26
|
09 | Gunter Van de Velde | Closed request for Last Call review by OPSDIR with state 'No Response' |
2018-03-15
|
09 | Tero Kivinen | Closed request for Last Call review by SECDIR with state 'No Response' |
2018-03-13
|
09 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to No IC from In Progress |
2018-03-12
|
09 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to In Progress |
2018-03-12
|
09 | (System) | RFC Editor state changed to EDIT |
2018-03-12
|
09 | (System) | IESG state changed to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent |
2018-03-12
|
09 | (System) | Announcement was received by RFC Editor |
2018-03-12
|
09 | Amy Vezza | IESG state changed to Approved-announcement sent from Approved-announcement to be sent::Point Raised - writeup needed |
2018-03-12
|
09 | Amy Vezza | IESG has approved the document |
2018-03-12
|
09 | Amy Vezza | Closed "Approve" ballot |
2018-03-12
|
09 | Amy Vezza | Ballot writeup was changed |
2018-03-09
|
09 | Deborah Brungard | Ballot approval text was changed |
2018-03-09
|
09 | Cindy Morgan | New version available: draft-ietf-lisp-signal-free-multicast-09.txt |
2018-03-09
|
09 | (System) | Secretariat manually posting. Approvals already received |
2018-03-09
|
09 | Cindy Morgan | Uploaded new revision |
2018-03-08
|
08 | Cindy Morgan | IESG state changed to Approved-announcement to be sent::Point Raised - writeup needed from IESG Evaluation |
2018-03-07
|
08 | Adam Roach | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Adam Roach |
2018-03-07
|
08 | Ben Campbell | [Ballot comment] Apologies, I ran out of time for this one. |
2018-03-07
|
08 | Ben Campbell | Ballot comment text updated for Ben Campbell |
2018-03-07
|
08 | Alissa Cooper | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Alissa Cooper |
2018-03-07
|
08 | Alia Atlas | [Ballot Position Update] Position for Alia Atlas has been changed to No Objection from No Record |
2018-03-07
|
08 | Kathleen Moriarty | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Kathleen Moriarty |
2018-03-07
|
08 | Spencer Dawkins | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Spencer Dawkins |
2018-03-06
|
08 | Suresh Krishnan | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Suresh Krishnan |
2018-03-06
|
08 | Alvaro Retana | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Alvaro Retana |
2018-03-06
|
08 | Alia Atlas | [Ballot Position Update] Position for Alia Atlas has been changed to No Record from Abstain |
2018-03-06
|
08 | Alia Atlas | [Ballot comment] I was involved in earlier versions of this document before becoming an AD. I completely understand the WG wishing to get it off … [Ballot comment] I was involved in earlier versions of this document before becoming an AD. I completely understand the WG wishing to get it off their plate and Experimental is a reasonable way of doing that. It is still disappointing that after 4+ years, there is no interest in actual implementations or comparing the two approaches quantitatively. There has simply not been good discussion. |
2018-03-06
|
08 | Alia Atlas | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Abstain, has been recorded for Alia Atlas |
2018-03-05
|
08 | Amanda Baber | IANA Review state changed to IANA OK - No Actions Needed from Version Changed - Review Needed |
2018-03-04
|
08 | Terry Manderson | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Terry Manderson |
2018-02-28
|
08 | Deborah Brungard | IESG state changed to IESG Evaluation from Waiting for Writeup |
2018-02-28
|
08 | Deborah Brungard | Ballot has been issued |
2018-02-28
|
08 | Deborah Brungard | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Deborah Brungard |
2018-02-28
|
08 | Deborah Brungard | Created "Approve" ballot |
2018-02-28
|
08 | Deborah Brungard | Ballot writeup was changed |
2018-02-28
|
08 | Martin Stiemerling | Closed request for Last Call review by TSVART with state 'Team Will not Review Version' |
2018-02-27
|
08 | (System) | IANA Review state changed to Version Changed - Review Needed from IANA OK - No Actions Needed |
2018-02-27
|
08 | Dino Farinacci | New version available: draft-ietf-lisp-signal-free-multicast-08.txt |
2018-02-27
|
08 | (System) | New version approved |
2018-02-27
|
08 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Dino Farinacci , Victor Moreno |
2018-02-27
|
08 | Dino Farinacci | Uploaded new revision |
2018-02-27
|
07 | (System) | IESG state changed to Waiting for Writeup from In Last Call |
2018-02-26
|
07 | Roni Even | Request for Last Call review by GENART Completed: Ready with Nits. Reviewer: Roni Even. Sent review to list. |
2018-02-22
|
07 | (System) | IANA Review state changed to IANA OK - No Actions Needed from IANA - Review Needed |
2018-02-22
|
07 | Sabrina Tanamal | (Via drafts-lastcall@iana.org): IESG/Authors/WG Chairs: The IANA Services Operator has reviewed draft-ietf-lisp-signal-free-multicast-07, 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-lisp-signal-free-multicast-07, 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 Senior IANA Services Specialist |
2018-02-16
|
07 | Tero Kivinen | Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Melinda Shore |
2018-02-16
|
07 | Tero Kivinen | Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Melinda Shore |
2018-02-15
|
07 | Jean Mahoney | Request for Last Call review by GENART is assigned to Roni Even |
2018-02-15
|
07 | Jean Mahoney | Request for Last Call review by GENART is assigned to Roni Even |
2018-02-15
|
07 | Wesley Eddy | Request for Last Call review by TSVART is assigned to Joseph Touch |
2018-02-15
|
07 | Wesley Eddy | Request for Last Call review by TSVART is assigned to Joseph Touch |
2018-02-14
|
07 | Gunter Van de Velde | Request for Last Call review by OPSDIR is assigned to Stefan Winter |
2018-02-14
|
07 | Gunter Van de Velde | Request for Last Call review by OPSDIR is assigned to Stefan Winter |
2018-02-13
|
07 | Cindy Morgan | IANA Review state changed to IANA - Review Needed |
2018-02-13
|
07 | Cindy Morgan | The following Last Call announcement was sent out (ends 2018-02-27): From: The IESG To: IETF-Announce CC: lisp-chairs@ietf.org, lisp@ietf.org, db3546@att.com, draft-ietf-lisp-signal-free-multicast@ietf.org, ggx@gigix.net … The following Last Call announcement was sent out (ends 2018-02-27): From: The IESG To: IETF-Announce CC: lisp-chairs@ietf.org, lisp@ietf.org, db3546@att.com, draft-ietf-lisp-signal-free-multicast@ietf.org, ggx@gigix.net, luigi.iannone@telecom-paristech.fr Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org Sender: Subject: Last Call: (Signal-Free LISP Multicast) to Experimental RFC The IESG has received a request from the Locator/ID Separation Protocol WG (lisp) to consider the following document: - 'Signal-Free LISP Multicast' as Experimental RFC 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 2018-02-27. 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 When multicast sources and receivers are active at LISP sites, the core network is required to use native multicast so packets can be delivered from sources to group members. When multicast is not available to connect the multicast sites together, a signal-free mechanism can be used to allow traffic to flow between sites. The mechanism within here uses unicast replication and encapsulation over the core network for the data-plane and uses the LISP mapping database system so encapsulators at the source LISP multicast site can find decapsulators at the receiver LISP multicast sites. The file can be obtained via https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lisp-signal-free-multicast/ IESG discussion can be tracked via https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lisp-signal-free-multicast/ballot/ No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D. |
2018-02-13
|
07 | Cindy Morgan | IESG state changed to In Last Call from Last Call Requested |
2018-02-13
|
07 | Deborah Brungard | Placed on agenda for telechat - 2018-03-08 |
2018-02-13
|
07 | Deborah Brungard | Changed consensus to Yes from Unknown |
2018-02-13
|
07 | Deborah Brungard | Last call was requested |
2018-02-13
|
07 | Deborah Brungard | Ballot approval text was generated |
2018-02-13
|
07 | Deborah Brungard | Ballot writeup was generated |
2018-02-13
|
07 | Deborah Brungard | IESG state changed to Last Call Requested from Publication Requested |
2018-02-13
|
07 | Deborah Brungard | Last call announcement was generated |
2018-01-11
|
07 | Min Ye | Request for Last Call review by RTGDIR Completed: Has Nits. Reviewer: Les Ginsberg. |
2017-12-26
|
07 | Min Ye | Request for Last Call review by RTGDIR is assigned to Les Ginsberg |
2017-12-26
|
07 | Min Ye | Request for Last Call review by RTGDIR is assigned to Les Ginsberg |
2017-12-21
|
07 | Min Ye | Request for Last Call review by RTGDIR is assigned to John Drake |
2017-12-21
|
07 | Min Ye | Request for Last Call review by RTGDIR is assigned to John Drake |
2017-12-20
|
07 | Min Ye | Request for Last Call review by RTGDIR is assigned to Bruno Decraene |
2017-12-20
|
07 | Min Ye | Request for Last Call review by RTGDIR is assigned to Bruno Decraene |
2017-12-17
|
07 | Min Ye | Request for Last Call review by RTGDIR is assigned to Ron Bonica |
2017-12-17
|
07 | Min Ye | Request for Last Call review by RTGDIR is assigned to Ron Bonica |
2017-12-15
|
07 | Deborah Brungard | Requested Last Call review by RTGDIR |
2017-12-15
|
07 | Luigi Iannone | draft-ietf-lisp-signal-free-multicast-07.txt Document Write-up As required by RFC 4858, this is the current template for the Document Shepherd Write-Up. (1) What type of RFC is … draft-ietf-lisp-signal-free-multicast-07.txt Document Write-up As required by RFC 4858, this is the current template for the Document Shepherd Write-Up. (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? This document is targeting publication as an Experimental RFC. It is the proper type of RFC since it proposes an extension to RFC 6831 LISP Multicast, which is an experimental document. The RFC type is clearly marked in the title page header. (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: The document propose an extension to the LISP Multicast mechanism in the specific case where sources and receivers are placed in LISP sites but the core network interconnecting these sites does not support any form of multicast. The proposed mechanism allow to create an overlay. More specifically this overlay create a unicast replication tree allowing to deliver multicast traffic from the sources to all receivers using LISP unicast encapsulation. Working Group Summary: The document has been around since 2014, and has been discussed several times. From the beginning, there was support, because it proposes a simple mechanism to effectively tackle the issue related to the lack of multicast support in the core network interconnecting LISP site using multicast. The WG has expressed a clear consensus on the -06 version of the document. While performing my review as a shepherd of the document I noticed that sometime the RFC 2119 terminology was missing/unclear. I asked the authors to clarify the text and this generated the -07 version, which the reference document for this write up. Because changing the RFC 2119 terminology is a technical change the -07 version of the document has been last called a second time to check if there was any objection from the WG. There was none. 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? There is at least one implementation of the proposed mechanism. Personnel: Who is the Document Shepherd? Luigi Iannone Who is the Responsible Area Director? Deborah Brungard . (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. I reviewed carefully the document. The text is sufficiently clear and understandable. I have checked the mailinglist and meeting minutes and publication WG consensus has been reached appropriately. I checked the ID nits (output provided on point 11) and everything is clear with the exception of: - a comment due to the fact that the publication date of -07 document is 17 days old. - a warning due to an unused reference, which can be cleared during IESG review. (4) Does the document Shepherd have any concerns about the depth or breadth of the reviews that have been performed? As the document shepherd I have no concerns. (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. I do not think that a additional specific review is needed. (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. I have no specific concerns or issues to point out. (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? All authors have made conforming IPR disclosure. (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 have been filed. (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? There has been clear consensus behind this document, showing that the WG as a whole understands and agree with it. (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.) Nobody did show discontent nor threatened an appeal. (11) Identify any ID nits the Document Shepherd has found in this document. (See http://www.ietf.org/tools/idnits/ and the Internet-Drafts Checklist). Boilerplate checks are not enough; this check needs to be thorough. tmp/draft-ietf-lisp-signal-free-multicast-07.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- The document date (November 28, 2017) is 17 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Experimental ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == Unused Reference: 'RFC5698' is defined on line 873, but no explicit reference was found in the text Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 1 warning (==), 1 comment (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (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? All references are clearly identified as Normative or Informative. (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? There are no normative references in unclear state. (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. There are no downward normative references. (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 existing RFC's status will change due to the publication of this document. (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). The document does not have IANA actions required. (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 expert review is required. (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. The document does not contain anything written in a formal language, hence, no validation and/or check has been performed. |
2017-12-15
|
07 | Luigi Iannone | Responsible AD changed to Deborah Brungard |
2017-12-15
|
07 | Luigi Iannone | IETF WG state changed to Submitted to IESG for Publication from WG Consensus: Waiting for Write-Up |
2017-12-15
|
07 | Luigi Iannone | IESG state changed to Publication Requested |
2017-12-15
|
07 | Luigi Iannone | IESG process started in state Publication Requested |
2017-12-15
|
07 | Luigi Iannone | Changed document writeup |
2017-12-15
|
07 | Luigi Iannone | Notification list changed to ggx@gigix.net from Luigi Iannone <luigi.iannone@telecom-paristech.fr> |
2017-12-15
|
07 | Luigi Iannone | Changed consensus to Unknown from Yes |
2017-12-15
|
07 | Luigi Iannone | IETF WG state changed to WG Consensus: Waiting for Write-Up from Waiting for WG Chair Go-Ahead |
2017-12-15
|
07 | Luigi Iannone | Changed consensus to Yes from Unknown |
2017-11-30
|
07 | Luigi Iannone | Because of some changes in the use of 2119 terminology chairs prefer to double check with WG if anybody objects. |
2017-11-30
|
07 | Luigi Iannone | IETF WG state changed to Waiting for WG Chair Go-Ahead from WG Consensus: Waiting for Write-Up |
2017-11-29
|
07 | Dino Farinacci | New version available: draft-ietf-lisp-signal-free-multicast-07.txt |
2017-11-29
|
07 | (System) | New version approved |
2017-11-29
|
07 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Dino Farinacci , Victor Moreno |
2017-11-29
|
07 | Dino Farinacci | Uploaded new revision |
2017-08-01
|
06 | Dino Farinacci | New version available: draft-ietf-lisp-signal-free-multicast-06.txt |
2017-08-01
|
06 | (System) | New version approved |
2017-08-01
|
06 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Dino Farinacci , Victor Moreno |
2017-08-01
|
06 | Dino Farinacci | Uploaded new revision |
2017-07-21
|
05 | Dino Farinacci | New version available: draft-ietf-lisp-signal-free-multicast-05.txt |
2017-07-21
|
05 | (System) | New version approved |
2017-07-21
|
05 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Dino Farinacci , Victor Moreno |
2017-07-21
|
05 | Dino Farinacci | Uploaded new revision |
2017-07-16
|
04 | Luigi Iannone | IETF WG state changed to WG Consensus: Waiting for Write-Up from In WG Last Call |
2017-07-16
|
04 | Luigi Iannone | Notification list changed to Luigi Iannone <luigi.iannone@telecom-paristech.fr> |
2017-07-16
|
04 | Luigi Iannone | Document shepherd changed to Luigi Iannone |
2017-05-06
|
04 | Dino Farinacci | New version available: draft-ietf-lisp-signal-free-multicast-04.txt |
2017-05-06
|
04 | (System) | New version approved |
2017-05-06
|
04 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Dino Farinacci , Victor Moreno |
2017-05-06
|
04 | Dino Farinacci | Uploaded new revision |
2017-04-13
|
03 | Dino Farinacci | New version available: draft-ietf-lisp-signal-free-multicast-03.txt |
2017-04-13
|
03 | (System) | New version approved |
2017-04-13
|
03 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Dino Farinacci , Victor Moreno |
2017-04-13
|
03 | Dino Farinacci | Uploaded new revision |
2017-03-11
|
02 | Luigi Iannone | IETF WG state changed to In WG Last Call from WG Document |
2017-03-11
|
02 | Luigi Iannone | Intended Status changed to Experimental from None |
2016-10-17
|
02 | Dino Farinacci | New version available: draft-ietf-lisp-signal-free-multicast-02.txt |
2016-10-17
|
02 | (System) | New version approved |
2016-10-17
|
01 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: "Victor Moreno" , "Dino Farinacci" |
2016-10-17
|
01 | Dino Farinacci | Uploaded new revision |
2016-04-21
|
01 | Dino Farinacci | New version available: draft-ietf-lisp-signal-free-multicast-01.txt |
2016-04-08
|
00 | Joel Halpern | This document now replaces draft-farinacci-lisp-signal-free-multicast instead of None |
2015-12-21
|
00 | Dino Farinacci | New version available: draft-ietf-lisp-signal-free-multicast-00.txt |