BGP Traffic Engineering Attribute
draft-ietf-softwire-bgp-te-attribute-04
Revision differences
Document history
Date | Rev. | By | Action |
---|---|---|---|
2009-03-31
|
04 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to RFC-Ed-Ack from Waiting on RFC Editor |
2009-03-31
|
04 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to Waiting on RFC Editor from In Progress |
2009-03-31
|
04 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to In Progress from Waiting on Authors |
2009-03-30
|
04 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to Waiting on Authors from In Progress |
2009-03-27
|
04 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to In Progress |
2009-03-27
|
04 | Cindy Morgan | State Changes to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent by Cindy Morgan |
2009-03-27
|
04 | Amy Vezza | IESG state changed to Approved-announcement sent |
2009-03-27
|
04 | Amy Vezza | IESG has approved the document |
2009-03-27
|
04 | Amy Vezza | Closed "Approve" ballot |
2009-01-30
|
04 | (System) | Removed from agenda for telechat - 2009-01-29 |
2009-01-29
|
04 | Cindy Morgan | State Changes to Approved-announcement to be sent::Point Raised - writeup needed from Waiting for AD Go-Ahead by Cindy Morgan |
2009-01-29
|
04 | (System) | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Ross Callon by IESG Secretary |
2009-01-29
|
04 | Dan Romascanu | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Dan Romascanu |
2009-01-29
|
04 | Magnus Westerlund | [Ballot comment] Section 3: When the Switching Capability field is PSC-1, PSC-2, PSC-3, or PSC-4, the Switching Capability specific information field includes Minimum … [Ballot comment] Section 3: When the Switching Capability field is PSC-1, PSC-2, PSC-3, or PSC-4, the Switching Capability specific information field includes Minimum LSP Bandwidth and Interface MTU. 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Minimum LSP Bandwidth | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Interface MTU | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ The Minimum LSP Bandwidth is encoded in a 4 octet field in the IEEE floating point format. The units are bytes (not bits!) per second. The Interface MTU is encoded as a 2 octet integer. I don't think this text is that clear. First of all, is the MTU value in octets or bits? I also assume that it is an unsigned integer, rather than a signed which the current language defaults to. The I wonder, is it clear on what level the MTU measurement is performed on. I know to little about what is actually represented by PSC-1 to PSC-4 to determine if the point in the stack the measurement is taken is always clear. |
2009-01-29
|
04 | Lisa Dusseault | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Lisa Dusseault |
2009-01-29
|
04 | Magnus Westerlund | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Magnus Westerlund |
2009-01-29
|
04 | Russ Housley | [Ballot comment] Please fix the email address for Yakov to be @juniper.net instead of @juniper.com as listed in the draft. |
2009-01-29
|
04 | Jari Arkko | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded by Jari Arkko |
2009-01-29
|
04 | Pasi Eronen | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Pasi Eronen |
2009-01-29
|
04 | Jon Peterson | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Jon Peterson |
2009-01-28
|
04 | Chris Newman | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Chris Newman |
2009-01-28
|
04 | Cullen Jennings | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Cullen Jennings |
2009-01-28
|
04 | Russ Housley | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Russ Housley |
2009-01-28
|
04 | Tim Polk | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Tim Polk |
2009-01-28
|
04 | David Ward | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Recuse, has been recorded by David Ward |
2009-01-28
|
04 | Lars Eggert | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Lars Eggert |
2009-01-27
|
04 | Ron Bonica | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Ron Bonica |
2009-01-12
|
04 | Mark Townsley | Placed on agenda for telechat - 2009-01-29 by Mark Townsley |
2008-12-22
|
04 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-softwire-bgp-te-attribute-04.txt |
2008-12-15
|
04 | (System) | State has been changed to Waiting for AD Go-Ahead from In Last Call by system |
2008-12-13
|
04 | Samuel Weiler | Request for Last Call review by SECDIR Completed. Reviewer: Kurt Zeilenga. |
2008-12-10
|
04 | Amanda Baber | IANA Last Call comments: Upon approval of this document, the IANA will make the following assignment in the "BGP Path Attributes" registry at http://www.iana.org/assignments/bgp-parameters/bgp-parameters.xhtml Value … IANA Last Call comments: Upon approval of this document, the IANA will make the following assignment in the "BGP Path Attributes" registry at http://www.iana.org/assignments/bgp-parameters/bgp-parameters.xhtml Value Code Reference ---- ---- --------- TBD Traffic Engineering [RFC-softwire-bgp-te-attribute-03] We understand the above to be the only IANA Action for this document. |
2008-12-06
|
04 | Samuel Weiler | Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Kurt Zeilenga |
2008-12-06
|
04 | Samuel Weiler | Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Kurt Zeilenga |
2008-12-01
|
04 | Amy Vezza | Last call sent |
2008-12-01
|
04 | Amy Vezza | State Changes to In Last Call from Last Call Requested by Amy Vezza |
2008-11-27
|
04 | Mark Townsley | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Mark Townsley |
2008-11-27
|
04 | Mark Townsley | Ballot has been issued by Mark Townsley |
2008-11-27
|
04 | Mark Townsley | Created "Approve" ballot |
2008-11-27
|
04 | Mark Townsley | State Changes to Last Call Requested from AD Evaluation by Mark Townsley |
2008-11-27
|
04 | Mark Townsley | Last Call was requested by Mark Townsley |
2008-11-27
|
04 | (System) | Ballot writeup text was added |
2008-11-27
|
04 | (System) | Last call text was added |
2008-11-27
|
04 | (System) | Ballot approval text was added |
2008-11-13
|
04 | Mark Townsley | State Changes to AD Evaluation from Publication Requested by Mark Townsley |
2008-10-27
|
04 | Cindy Morgan | draft-ietf-softwire-bgp-te-attribute-03.txt PROTO questionnaire for: prepared by: Dave Ward (dward@cisco.com) 1.a) Have the chairs personally reviewed this version of the Internet Draft (ID), and … draft-ietf-softwire-bgp-te-attribute-03.txt PROTO questionnaire for: prepared by: Dave Ward (dward@cisco.com) 1.a) Have the chairs personally reviewed this version of the Internet Draft (ID), and in particular, do they believe this ID is ready to forward to the IESG for publication? Which chair is the WG Chair Shepherd for this document? Dave Ward 1.c) Do you have concerns that the document needs more review from a particular (broader) perspective (e.g., security, operational complexity, someone familiar with AAA, internationalization, XML, etc.)? No. 1.d) Do you have any specific concerns/issues with this document that you believe the ADs and/or IESG should be aware of? For example, perhaps you are uncomfortable with certain parts of the document, or have concerns whether there really is a need for it. In any event, if your issues have been discussed in the WG and the WG has indicated it that it still wishes to advance the document, detail those concerns in the write-up. No. 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? There is strong WG consensus behind this document and no one that has expressed concerns about its progression. 1.f) Has anyone threatened an appeal or otherwise indicated extreme discontent? If so, please summarise the areas of conflict in separate email to the Responsible Area Director. (It should be separate email because this questionnaire will be entered into the tracker). No. 1.g) Have the chairs verified that the document checks out against all the ID nits? (see http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html). Boilerplate checks are not enough; this check needs to be thorough. Yes. 1.h) Has the document split its references into normative and informative? Are there normative references to IDs, where the IDs are not also ready for advancement or are otherwise in an unclear state? The RFC Editor will not publish an RFC with normative references to IDs (will delay the publication until all such IDs are also ready for RFC publicatioin). If the normative references are behind, what is the strategy for their completion? On a related matter, are there normative references that are downward references, as described in BCP 97, RFC 3967 RFC 3967 [RFC3967]? Listing these supports the Area Director in the Last Call downref procedure specified in RFC 3967. The references are split into normative and informative. Protocol write-up for: by Dave Ward, dward@cisco.com Technical Summary This document defines a new BGP attribute, Traffic Engineering attribute, than enables BGP to carry Traffic Engineering information. The scope and applicability of this attribute currently excludes its use for non-VPN reachability information. Working Group Summary The SOFTWIRE WG supports the development and advancement of this document. Protocol Quality This document was thoroughly reviewed by WG chairs and WG members, including those with expertise in IPv4 to IPv6 transitions and interworking. Dave Ward is the WG chair shepherd. Mark Townsley is the responsible Area director. |
2008-10-27
|
04 | Cindy Morgan | Draft Added by Cindy Morgan in state Publication Requested |
2008-09-10
|
03 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-softwire-bgp-te-attribute-03.txt |
2008-09-04
|
02 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-softwire-bgp-te-attribute-02.txt |
2008-08-04
|
01 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-softwire-bgp-te-attribute-01.txt |
2008-01-23
|
00 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-softwire-bgp-te-attribute-00.txt |