IPv6 Host-to-Router Load Sharing
RFC 4311
Revision differences
Document history
| Date | Rev. | By | Action |
|---|---|---|---|
|
2015-10-14
|
04 | (System) | Notify list changed from bob.hinden@nokia.com, brian@innovationslab.net to (None) |
|
2012-08-22
|
04 | (System) | post-migration administrative database adjustment to the No Objection position for Bill Fenner |
|
2012-08-22
|
04 | (System) | post-migration administrative database adjustment to the No Objection position for Alex Zinin |
|
2005-12-06
|
04 | Amy Vezza | State Changes to RFC Published from RFC Ed Queue by Amy Vezza |
|
2005-12-06
|
04 | Amy Vezza | [Note]: 'RFC 4311' added by Amy Vezza |
|
2005-11-01
|
04 | (System) | RFC published |
|
2005-07-29
|
04 | Amy Vezza | State Changes to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent by Amy Vezza |
|
2005-07-06
|
04 | Amy Vezza | IESG state changed to Approved-announcement sent |
|
2005-07-06
|
04 | Amy Vezza | IESG has approved the document |
|
2005-07-06
|
04 | Amy Vezza | Closed "Approve" ballot |
|
2005-07-06
|
04 | Amy Vezza | State Changes to Approved-announcement to be sent from IESG Evaluation::AD Followup by Amy Vezza |
|
2005-07-05
|
04 | Alex Zinin | [Ballot Position Update] Position for Alex Zinin has been changed to No Objection from Discuss by Alex Zinin |
|
2005-07-01
|
04 | Bill Fenner | [Ballot Position Update] Position for Bill Fenner has been changed to No Objection from Discuss by Bill Fenner |
|
2005-06-30
|
04 | (System) | Sub state has been changed to AD Follow up from New Id Needed |
|
2005-06-30
|
04 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-ipv6-host-load-sharing-04.txt |
|
2005-04-06
|
04 | Michelle Cotton | IANA Comments: We understand this document to have no IANA Actions. |
|
2005-04-01
|
04 | (System) | Removed from agenda for telechat - 2005-03-31 |
|
2005-03-31
|
04 | Amy Vezza | State Changes to IESG Evaluation::Revised ID Needed from IESG Evaluation by Amy Vezza |
|
2005-03-31
|
04 | Bill Fenner | [Ballot discuss] I think this should be listed as updating whatever existing RFCs describe the current algorithm ([ND] and [ROUTERSEL], maybe?), so that the RFC … [Ballot discuss] I think this should be listed as updating whatever existing RFCs describe the current algorithm ([ND] and [ROUTERSEL], maybe?), so that the RFC Index has a forward pointer from the possibly-bad algorithms. |
|
2005-03-31
|
04 | Bill Fenner | [Ballot Position Update] Position for Bill Fenner has been changed to Discuss from No Objection by Bill Fenner |
|
2005-03-31
|
04 | Allison Mankin | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Allison Mankin by Allison Mankin |
|
2005-03-31
|
04 | Bert Wijnen | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Bert Wijnen by Bert Wijnen |
|
2005-03-31
|
04 | Bill Fenner | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Bill Fenner by Bill Fenner |
|
2005-03-31
|
04 | Jon Peterson | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Jon Peterson by Jon Peterson |
|
2005-03-30
|
04 | David Kessens | [Ballot comment] Comments from the Ops directorate by Pekka Savola (Mar 30 17:47:13 PST 2005): Basically a good document. Two medium-level comments: - [ROUTERSEL] should … [Ballot comment] Comments from the Ops directorate by Pekka Savola (Mar 30 17:47:13 PST 2005): Basically a good document. Two medium-level comments: - [ROUTERSEL] should probably be a Normative reference, as the doc appears to be referring/depending on that behaviour. The draft in question is past the IESG, in AD followup so it shouldn't be an issue. - Introduction says, "It is typically desirable when there is more than one equivalent router that hosts distribute their outgoing traffic among these routers. This shares the load among multiple routers and provides better performance for the host's traffic." I would s/typically/often/, because whether this is really typical or not is in the eye of the beholder, and I doubt there's any real measurement of the desired behaviour out there. |
|
2005-03-30
|
04 | David Kessens | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for David Kessens by David Kessens |
|
2005-03-30
|
04 | Russ Housley | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Russ Housley by Russ Housley |
|
2005-03-30
|
04 | Mark Townsley | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Mark Townsley by Mark Townsley |
|
2005-03-29
|
04 | Brian Carpenter | [Ballot comment] Review comment: There's one minor nit in that the [ROUTERSEL] reference needs updating, but that can be resolved by RFC editor or during … [Ballot comment] Review comment: There's one minor nit in that the [ROUTERSEL] reference needs updating, but that can be resolved by RFC editor or during AUTH48. Regards, Mary H. Barnes mary.barnes@nortel.com |
|
2005-03-29
|
04 | Brian Carpenter | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Brian Carpenter by Brian Carpenter |
|
2005-03-27
|
04 | Sam Hartman | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Sam Hartman by Sam Hartman |
|
2005-03-24
|
04 | Alex Zinin | [Ballot discuss] I almost pushed "Yes" on this document--it's really a great job. A discuss'y DISCUSS: The load-sharing algorithm suggested in Section 2 can … [Ballot discuss] I almost pushed "Yes" on this document--it's really a great job. A discuss'y DISCUSS: The load-sharing algorithm suggested in Section 2 can do better on a larger scale if it takes into consideration not only the destination address, but the src-dst pair. The situation to think about is multiple hosts running the same implementation (hence using the same algorithm) and communicating with the same remote host(s), e.g. a server (farm). If only dst is fed into the function, traffic from different hosts to the same dst will be polarized and will use only one router. If src is added, a better distribution can be achieved. |
|
2005-03-24
|
04 | Alex Zinin | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded for Alex Zinin by Alex Zinin |
|
2005-03-21
|
04 | Scott Hollenbeck | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Scott Hollenbeck by Scott Hollenbeck |
|
2005-03-20
|
04 | Margaret Cullen | State Changes to IESG Evaluation from Waiting for Writeup by Margaret Wasserman |
|
2005-03-20
|
04 | Margaret Cullen | Submission Questionnaire: 1) Have the chairs personally reviewed this version of the ID and do they believe this ID is sufficiently baked to forward … Submission Questionnaire: 1) Have the chairs personally reviewed this version of the ID and do they believe this ID is sufficiently baked to forward to the IESG for publication? Yes 2) Has the document had adequate review from both key WG members and key non-WG members? Do you have any concerns about the depth or breadth of the reviews that have been performed? This document has been reviewed by multiple members of the WG. We do not have any concerns on those reviews. 3) Do you have concerns that the document needs more review from a particular (broader) perspective (e.g., security, operational complexity, someone familiar with AAA, etc.)? No 4) 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 whether there really is a need for it, etc., but at the same time these issues have been discussed in the WG and the WG has indicated it wishes to advance the document anyway. No concerns 5) 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 a strong concurrence among key WG members 6) Has anyone threatened an appeal or otherwise indicated extreme discontent? If so, please summarize what are they upset about. No known threats 7) Have the chairs verified that the document adheres to _all_ of the ID nits? Yes - Technical Summary The original IPv6 conceptual sending algorithm does not do load- sharing among equivalent IPv6 routers, and suggests schemes which can be problematic in practice. This document updates the conceptual sending algorithm so that traffic to different destinations can be distributed among routers in an efficient fashion. - Working Group Summary The IPv6 working group has done extensive review of this document and this document reflects the consensus of the group. - Protocol Quality This document has been reviewed by members of the ipv6@ietf.org mailing list and by the working group chairs. Regards, Brian & Bob IPv6 WG co-chairs |
|
2005-03-20
|
04 | Margaret Cullen | Placed on agenda for telechat - 2005-03-31 by Margaret Wasserman |
|
2005-03-20
|
04 | Margaret Cullen | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Margaret Wasserman |
|
2005-03-20
|
04 | Margaret Cullen | Ballot has been issued by Margaret Wasserman |
|
2005-03-20
|
04 | Margaret Cullen | Created "Approve" ballot |
|
2005-03-18
|
04 | (System) | State has been changed to Waiting for Writeup from In Last Call by system |
|
2005-02-25
|
04 | Amy Vezza | Last call sent |
|
2005-02-25
|
04 | Amy Vezza | State Changes to In Last Call from Last Call Requested by Amy Vezza |
|
2005-02-25
|
04 | Margaret Cullen | State Changes to Last Call Requested from Publication Requested by Margaret Wasserman |
|
2005-02-25
|
04 | Margaret Cullen | Last Call was requested by Margaret Wasserman |
|
2005-02-25
|
04 | (System) | Ballot writeup text was added |
|
2005-02-25
|
04 | (System) | Last call text was added |
|
2005-02-25
|
04 | (System) | Ballot approval text was added |
|
2005-01-18
|
04 | Dinara Suleymanova | Draft Added by Dinara Suleymanova in state Publication Requested |
|
2004-10-21
|
03 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-ipv6-host-load-sharing-03.txt |
|
2004-05-05
|
02 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-ipv6-host-load-sharing-02.txt |
|
2004-02-03
|
01 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-ipv6-host-load-sharing-01.txt |
|
2002-01-10
|
00 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-ipv6-host-load-sharing-00.txt |