Impact of Shortest Path First (SPF) Trigger and Delay Strategies on IGP Micro-loops
draft-ietf-rtgwg-spf-uloop-pb-statement-10

Approval announcement
Draft of message to be sent after approval:

Announcement

From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-rtgwg-spf-uloop-pb-statement@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, chrisbowers.ietf@gmail.com, rtgwg-chairs@ietf.org, Chris Bowers <chrisbowers.ietf@gmail.com>, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, martin.vigoureux@nokia.com, rtgwg@ietf.org
Subject: Document Action: 'Link State protocols SPF trigger and delay algorithm impact on IGP micro-loops' to Informational RFC (draft-ietf-rtgwg-spf-uloop-pb-statement-10.txt)

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Link State protocols SPF trigger and delay algorithm impact on IGP
   micro-loops'
  (draft-ietf-rtgwg-spf-uloop-pb-statement-10.txt) as Informational RFC

This document is the product of the Routing Area Working Group.

The IESG contact persons are Alvaro Retana, Deborah Brungard and Martin
Vigoureux.

A URL of this Internet Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-rtgwg-spf-uloop-pb-statement/

Ballot Text

Technical Summary

Micro-loops are transient forwarding loops that can occur among 
routers using hop-by-hop forwarding. This document analyzes
the impact of using different Link State IGP implementations
in a single network with respect to micro-loops.  
The analysis focuses on the SPF triggers and SPF delay algorithms.

Working Group Summary

The final version of the document has strong consensus in the WG. Input 
from the WG was incorporated in the document.

Document Quality

The document is of high quality.

Two Routing Area Directorate reviews were done.  The first was
done by Mike Shand around the time of working group adoption.
This review pointed out some issues related to terminology and phrasing,
as well as a generalization about the size of networks.  These 
issues were addressed by the authors.

The main issue raised by the second review (done by Tomonori Takeda)
was the fact the document was classified as Standards Track.  This 
was addressed by changing it to Informational.

Personnel

  Document Shepherd: Chris Bowers
  Responsible Area Director: Martin Vigoureux

RFC Editor Note