Problem Statement for Service Function Chaining
RFC 7498

Approval announcement
Draft of message to be sent after approval:

From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
Cc: RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>,
    sfc mailing list <sfc@ietf.org>,
    sfc chair <sfc-chairs@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Document Action: 'Service Function Chaining Problem Statement' to Informational RFC (draft-ietf-sfc-problem-statement-13.txt)

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Service Function Chaining Problem Statement'
  (draft-ietf-sfc-problem-statement-13.txt) as Informational RFC

This document is the product of the Service Function Chaining Working
Group.

The IESG contact persons are Adrian Farrel and Alia Atlas.

A URL of this Internet Draft is:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sfc-problem-statement/


Technical Summary

This document provides an overview of the issues associated with the
deployment of service functions (such as firewalls, load balancers) in
large-scale environments.  The term service function chaining is used to
describe the definition and instantiation of an ordered set of instances
of such service functions, and the subsequent "steering" of traffic
flows through those service functions.

Working Group Summary

This document has been reviewed multiple times by many participants in
the working group.  Much of the content is widely supported, with
minimal controversy.  There has been some controversy around the content
of section 3, which describes at a very high level the components of a
service chaining solution.  The working group chairs have concluded that
the working group rough consensus is in favor of retaining that text in
this document.

Document Quality

The document is in good shape, and the shepherd agrees with the chairs
conclusion that it is ready for publication as an Informational RFC.

There has been no formal review by outside experts, as this is an
informational problem statement and does not therefore need any
specified formal reviews.

The shepherd has observed that the wg has received confirmation from all
authors that all relevant IPR has been disclosed.  There is one IPR
disclosure which has caused the working group some concern.  The chairs
concluded that the WG had rough consensus to publish the document in the
presence of the IPR disclosure.

Personnel

   Document Shepherd:  Joel Halpern
   Responsible Area Director: Alia Atlas