Skip to main content

Graceful BGP Session Shutdown
RFC 8326

Revision differences

Document history

Date Rev. By Action
2020-01-21
13 (System) Received changes through RFC Editor sync (added Verified Errata tag)
2018-06-22
13 (System) Received changes through RFC Editor sync (added Errata tag)
2018-03-06
13 (System)
Received changes through RFC Editor sync (created alias RFC 8326, changed title to 'Graceful BGP Session Shutdown', changed abstract to 'This document standardizes a …
Received changes through RFC Editor sync (created alias RFC 8326, changed title to 'Graceful BGP Session Shutdown', changed abstract to 'This document standardizes a new well-known BGP community, GRACEFUL_SHUTDOWN, to signal the graceful shutdown of paths.  This document also describes operational procedures that use this well-known community to reduce the amount of traffic lost when BGP peering sessions are about to be shut down deliberately, e.g., for planned maintenance.', changed pages to 12, changed standardization level to Proposed Standard, changed state to RFC, added RFC published event at 2018-03-06, changed IESG state to RFC Published)
2018-03-06
13 (System) RFC published
2018-03-02
13 (System) RFC Editor state changed to <a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc8326">AUTH48-DONE</a> from AUTH48
2018-02-21
13 (System) RFC Editor state changed to <a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc8326">AUTH48</a> from RFC-EDITOR
2018-01-26
13 (System) RFC Editor state changed to RFC-EDITOR from EDIT
2018-01-18
13 Tero Kivinen Closed request for Last Call review by SECDIR with state 'No Response'
2018-01-18
13 Susan Hares Request for Last Call review by OPSDIR Completed: Has Nits. Reviewer: Susan Hares. Sent review to list.
2018-01-16
13 (System) IANA Action state changed to RFC-Ed-Ack from Waiting on RFC Editor
2018-01-13
13 (System) IANA Action state changed to Waiting on RFC Editor from Waiting on Authors
2018-01-12
13 (System) IANA Action state changed to Waiting on Authors from In Progress
2018-01-12
13 (System) IANA Action state changed to In Progress
2018-01-12
13 (System) RFC Editor state changed to EDIT
2018-01-12
13 (System) IESG state changed to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent
2018-01-12
13 (System) Announcement was received by RFC Editor
2018-01-12
13 Amy Vezza IESG state changed to Approved-announcement sent from Approved-announcement to be sent
2018-01-12
13 Amy Vezza IESG has approved the document
2018-01-12
13 Amy Vezza Closed "Approve" ballot
2018-01-12
13 Amy Vezza Ballot approval text was generated
2018-01-12
13 Amy Vezza Ballot writeup was changed
2018-01-12
13 Amy Vezza Ballot approval text was generated
2018-01-12
13 Amy Vezza IESG state changed to Approved-announcement to be sent from Waiting for AD Go-Ahead
2018-01-11
13 (System) IESG state changed to Waiting for AD Go-Ahead from In Last Call
2018-01-04
13 (System) IANA Review state changed to IANA OK - Actions Needed from Version Changed - Review Needed
2018-01-04
13 Sabrina Tanamal
(Via drafts-lastcall@iana.org): IESG/Authors/WG Chairs:

The IANA Services Operator has completed its review of draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut-13. If any part of this review is inaccurate, please let …
(Via drafts-lastcall@iana.org): IESG/Authors/WG Chairs:

The IANA Services Operator has completed its review of draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut-13. If any part of this review is inaccurate, please let us know.

The IANA Services Operator understands that, upon approval of this document, there is a single action which we must complete.

In the BGP Well-known Communities on the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) Well-known Communities registry page located at:

https://www.iana.org/assignments/bgp-well-known-communities/

the early assignment of Attribute Value 0XFFFF0000 appears as follows:

Attribute Value: 0xFFFF0000
Attribute: planned-shut
Reference: [ draft-francois-bgp-gshut ][Pierre_Francois}

This registration will be changed to:

Attribute Value: 0xFFFF0000
Attribute: GRACEFUL_SHUTDOWN
Reference: [ RFC-to-be ]

The IANA Services Operator understands that this is the only action required to be completed upon approval of this document.

Note:  The actions requested in this document will not be completed until the document has been approved for publication as an RFC. This message is only to confirm the list of actions that will be performed.


Thank you,

Sabrina Tanamal
Senior IANA Services Specialist
2017-12-31
13 Gunter Van de Velde Request for Last Call review by OPSDIR is assigned to Susan Hares
2017-12-31
13 Gunter Van de Velde Request for Last Call review by OPSDIR is assigned to Susan Hares
2017-12-19
13 Gunter Van de Velde Closed request for Last Call review by OPSDIR with state 'No Response'
2017-12-18
13 Alvaro Retana [Ballot Position Update] Position for Alvaro Retana has been changed to Yes from Discuss
2017-12-14
13 Amy Vezza
The following Last Call announcement was sent out (ends 2018-01-11):<br><br>From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
CC: draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut@ietf.org, grow-chairs@ietf.org, …
The following Last Call announcement was sent out (ends 2018-01-11):<br><br>From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
CC: draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut@ietf.org, grow-chairs@ietf.org, grow@ietf.org, Christopher Morrow <christopher.morrow@gmail.com>, christopher.morrow@gmail.com, warren@kumari.net
Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org
Sender: <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
Subject: Last Call: <draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut-13.txt> (Graceful BGP session shutdown) to Proposed Standard


The IESG has received a request from the Global Routing Operations WG (grow)
to consider the following document: - 'Graceful BGP session shutdown'
  <draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut-13.txt> as Proposed Standard

This is a second IETF Last Call. The document had an initial LC as an Informational
document, but the IESG felt it was more appropriate to be Standards Track. As the
Last Call time will run into the end of the year holiday period, we are requesting
a 4-week Last Call.

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 2018-01-11. 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


  This draft standardizes a new well-known BGP community
  GRACEFUL_SHUTDOWN to signal the graceful shutdown of paths.  This
  draft also describes operational procedures which use this community
  to reduce the amount of traffic lost when BGP peering sessions are
  about to be shut down deliberately, e.g. for planned maintenance.




The file can be obtained via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut/

IESG discussion can be tracked via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut/ballot/


No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.


The document contains these normative downward references.
See RFC 3967 for additional information:
    rfc6198: Requirements for the Graceful Shutdown of BGP Sessions (Informational - IETF stream)



2017-12-14
13 Amy Vezza IESG state changed to In Last Call from Last Call Requested
2017-12-14
13 Amy Vezza Last call announcement was changed
2017-12-14
13 Amy Vezza Last call announcement was generated
2017-12-14
13 Amy Vezza Last call was requested
2017-12-14
13 Amy Vezza IESG state changed to Last Call Requested from IESG Evaluation
2017-12-14
13 Jean Mahoney Closed request for Telechat review by GENART with state 'Team Will not Review Version'
2017-12-14
13 Warren Kumari Last call announcement was changed
2017-12-14
13 (System) IANA Review state changed to Version Changed - Review Needed from IANA OK - Actions Needed
2017-12-14
13 Bruno Decraene New version available: draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut-13.txt
2017-12-14
13 (System) New version approved
2017-12-14
13 (System)
Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Pierre Francois <pfrpfr@gmail.com>, Clarence Filsfils <cfilsfil@cisco.com>, Bruno Decraene <bruno.decraene@orange.com>, Cristel Pelsser …
Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Pierre Francois <pfrpfr@gmail.com>, Clarence Filsfils <cfilsfil@cisco.com>, Bruno Decraene <bruno.decraene@orange.com>, Cristel Pelsser <pelsser@unistra.fr>, Keyur Patel <keyur@arrcus.com>
2017-12-14
13 Bruno Decraene Uploaded new revision
2017-12-14
12 Warren Kumari
As suggested in the IESG Evaluation, STD Track makes more sense for this -- unfortunately, this needs another IETF LC (Std Track is 4 weeks, …
As suggested in the IESG Evaluation, STD Track makes more sense for this -- unfortunately, this needs another IETF LC (Std Track is 4 weeks, Informational was only 2 weeks).
Change discussed with authors, new version to be posted and then new LC started.
2017-12-14
12 Warren Kumari Intended Status changed to Proposed Standard from Informational
2017-12-14
12 Mirja Kühlewind
[Ballot comment]
I also believe this should be standards track. Or is there any good reason why it should not be standards track similar as …
[Ballot comment]
I also believe this should be standards track. Or is there any good reason why it should not be standards track similar as other docs that define well known communities?
2017-12-14
12 Mirja Kühlewind [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Mirja Kühlewind
2017-12-13
12 Suresh Krishnan [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Suresh Krishnan
2017-12-13
12 Ben Campbell
[Ballot comment]
I'm balloting "yes" because I think it's important to publish this. But, like Alvaro,  I wonder why this is not standards track, BCP, …
[Ballot comment]
I'm balloting "yes" because I think it's important to publish this. But, like Alvaro,  I wonder why this is not standards track, BCP, or just about anything but informational. So I support his DISCUSS, including his the comments on how to resolve it.

-1, last paragraph: This references RFC 8174, but does not use the actual 8174 boilerplate. Is there a reason not to do so?
2017-12-13
12 Ben Campbell [Ballot Position Update] Position for Ben Campbell has been changed to Yes from No Objection
2017-12-13
12 Ben Campbell
[Ballot comment]
I also wonder why this is not standards track, BCP, or just about anything but informational. So I support Alvaro's DISCUSS, including his …
[Ballot comment]
I also wonder why this is not standards track, BCP, or just about anything but informational. So I support Alvaro's DISCUSS, including his the comments on how to resolve it.

-1, last paragraph: This references RFC 8174, but does not use the actual 8174 boilerplate. Is there a reason not to do so?
2017-12-13
12 Ben Campbell [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Ben Campbell
2017-12-13
12 Alvaro Retana
[Ballot discuss]
Why is this document not in the Standards Track?  I ask because I think that the definition of a well-known community (one which …
[Ballot discuss]
Why is this document not in the Standards Track?  I ask because I think that the definition of a well-known community (one which has "global significance and their operations shall be implemented in any community-attribute-aware BGP speaker" [rfc1997], in other words, everywhere!) should result in a Standards Track specification, and not in an Informational document.  I couldn't find any specific justification for the status in the writeups (Shepherd or Ballot), nor a related discussion in the archive.

To resolve this DISCUSS, I would prefer to see a change in the status, but will yield to WG consensus (so a pointer to that discussion would be enough).
2017-12-13
12 Alvaro Retana [Ballot comment]
Nit:  It would be very nice if the appendices were referenced in the text.
2017-12-13
12 Alvaro Retana [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded for Alvaro Retana
2017-12-13
12 Alia Atlas [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Alia Atlas
2017-12-13
12 Terry Manderson [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Terry Manderson
2017-12-13
12 Deborah Brungard [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Deborah Brungard
2017-12-13
12 Kathleen Moriarty [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Kathleen Moriarty
2017-12-12
12 Alissa Cooper [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Alissa Cooper
2017-12-12
12 Benoît Claise [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Benoit Claise
2017-12-11
12 Alexey Melnikov [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Alexey Melnikov
2017-10-22
12 (System) IANA Review state changed to IANA OK - Actions Needed from Version Changed - Review Needed
2017-10-19
12 Jean Mahoney Request for Telechat review by GENART is assigned to Matthew Miller
2017-10-19
12 Jean Mahoney Request for Telechat review by GENART is assigned to Matthew Miller
2017-10-16
12 Warren Kumari IESG state changed to IESG Evaluation from Waiting for AD Go-Ahead
2017-10-16
12 Warren Kumari Ballot has been issued
2017-10-16
12 Warren Kumari [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Warren Kumari
2017-10-16
12 Warren Kumari Created "Approve" ballot
2017-10-16
12 Warren Kumari Placed on agenda for telechat - 2017-12-14
2017-10-12
12 (System) IANA Review state changed to Version Changed - Review Needed from IANA OK - Actions Needed
2017-10-12
12 Bruno Decraene New version available: draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut-12.txt
2017-10-12
12 (System) New version approved
2017-10-12
12 (System)
Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Pierre Francois <pfrpfr@gmail.com>, Clarence Filsfils <cfilsfil@cisco.com>, Bruno Decraene <bruno.decraene@orange.com>, Cristel Pelsser …
Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Pierre Francois <pfrpfr@gmail.com>, Clarence Filsfils <cfilsfil@cisco.com>, Bruno Decraene <bruno.decraene@orange.com>, Cristel Pelsser <pelsser@unistra.fr>, Keyur Patel <keyur@arrcus.com>
2017-10-12
12 Bruno Decraene Uploaded new revision
2017-10-11
11 (System) IANA Review state changed to IANA OK - Actions Needed from IANA - Review Needed
2017-10-11
11 Sabrina Tanamal
(Via drafts-lastcall@iana.org): IESG/Authors/WG Chairs:

The IANA Services Operator has completed its review of draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut-11. If any part of this review is inaccurate, please let …
(Via drafts-lastcall@iana.org): IESG/Authors/WG Chairs:

The IANA Services Operator has completed its review of draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut-11. If any part of this review is inaccurate, please let us know.

The IANA Services Operator understands that, upon approval of this document, there is a single action which we must complete.

In the BGP Well-known Communities on the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) Well-known Communities registry page located at:

https://www.iana.org/assignments/bgp-well-known-communities/

the early assignment of Attribute Value 0XFFFF0000 appears as follows:

Attribute Value: 0xFFFF0000
Attribute: planned-shut
Reference: [ draft-francois-bgp-gshut ][Pierre_Francois}

This registration will be changed to:

Attribute Value: 0xFFFF0000
Attribute: GRACEFUL_SHUTDOWN
Reference: [ RFC-to-be ]

The IANA Services Operator understands that this is the only action required to be completed upon approval of this document.

Note:  The actions requested in this document will not be completed until the document has been approved for publication as an RFC. This message is only to confirm what actions will be performed.


Thank you,

Sabrina Tanamal
IANA Services Specialist
2017-10-11
11 (System) IESG state changed to Waiting for AD Go-Ahead from In Last Call
2017-10-09
11 Matthew Miller Request for Last Call review by GENART Completed: Ready with Issues. Reviewer: Matthew Miller. Sent review to list.
2017-10-04
11 Gunter Van de Velde Request for Last Call review by OPSDIR is assigned to Niclas Comstedt
2017-10-04
11 Gunter Van de Velde Request for Last Call review by OPSDIR is assigned to Niclas Comstedt
2017-10-04
11 Jonathan Hardwick Request for Last Call review by RTGDIR Completed: Ready. Reviewer: Matthew Bocci.
2017-09-28
11 Jean Mahoney Request for Last Call review by GENART is assigned to Matthew Miller
2017-09-28
11 Jean Mahoney Request for Last Call review by GENART is assigned to Matthew Miller
2017-09-28
11 Tero Kivinen Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Shaun Cooley
2017-09-28
11 Tero Kivinen Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Shaun Cooley
2017-09-27
11 Min Ye Request for Last Call review by RTGDIR is assigned to Matthew Bocci
2017-09-27
11 Min Ye Request for Last Call review by RTGDIR is assigned to Matthew Bocci
2017-09-27
11 Alvaro Retana Requested Last Call review by RTGDIR
2017-09-27
11 Amy Vezza IANA Review state changed to IANA - Review Needed
2017-09-27
11 Amy Vezza
The following Last Call announcement was sent out (ends 2017-10-11):<br><br>From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
CC: draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut@ietf.org, grow-chairs@ietf.org, …
The following Last Call announcement was sent out (ends 2017-10-11):<br><br>From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
CC: draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut@ietf.org, grow-chairs@ietf.org, grow@ietf.org, Christopher Morrow <christopher.morrow@gmail.com>, christopher.morrow@gmail.com, warren@kumari.net
Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org
Sender: <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
Subject: Last Call: <draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut-11.txt> (Graceful BGP session shutdown) to Informational RFC


The IESG has received a request from the Global Routing Operations WG (grow)
to consider the following document: - 'Graceful BGP session shutdown'
  <draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut-11.txt> as Informational 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 2017-10-11. 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


  This draft standardizes a new well-known BGP community
  GRACEFUL_SHUTDOWN to signal the graceful shutdown of paths.  This
  draft also describes operational procedures which use this community
  to reduce the amount of traffic lost when BGP peering sessions are
  about to be shut down deliberately, e.g. for planned maintenance.




The file can be obtained via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut/

IESG discussion can be tracked via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut/ballot/


No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.




2017-09-27
11 Amy Vezza IESG state changed to In Last Call from Last Call Requested
2017-09-27
11 Warren Kumari Last call was requested
2017-09-27
11 Warren Kumari Last call announcement was generated
2017-09-27
11 Warren Kumari Ballot approval text was generated
2017-09-27
11 Warren Kumari IESG state changed to Last Call Requested from AD Evaluation
2017-09-26
11 Warren Kumari Ballot writeup was changed
2017-09-26
11 Warren Kumari Changed consensus to Yes from Yes
2017-09-26
11 Warren Kumari Changed consensus to Yes from Unknown
2017-09-26
11 Warren Kumari IESG state changed to AD Evaluation from Publication Requested
2017-09-25
11 Chris Morrow
As required by RFC 4858, this is the current template for the Document
Shepherd Write-Up.

Changes are expected over time. This version is dated …
As required by RFC 4858, this is the current template for the Document
Shepherd Write-Up.

Changes are expected over time. This version is dated 24 February 2012.

(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?

Informational

(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

  This draft standardizes a new well-known BGP community
  GRACEFUL_SHUTDOWN to signal the graceful shutdown of paths.  This
  draft also describes operational procedures which use this community
  to reduce the amount of traffic lost when BGP peering sessions are
  about to be shut down deliberately, e.g. for planned maintenance.

Working Group Summary

This document spent a long time in WG (10 years or so), with progress early on, then awaiting other work to finish.. and finally a last surge of call/response/fixes and now we're all consensused up and believe this is a great step forward for the tubes!

Document Quality

There are existing platforms which respect the draft community, the document got some last minute cleanup / reorg and is in good shape today.

Personnel

  Who is the Document Shepherd? Who is the Responsible Area
  Director?

Shepherd: Christopher Morrow (me)
ResponsibleAD: Warren Kumari

(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.

The shepherd reviewed the document early on in it's process, then in the final-throes suggested some edits and reviewed response comments both from the authors and from collaborators.

(4) Does the document Shepherd have any concerns about the depth or
breadth of the reviews that have been performed?

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 believe there is expert review required.

(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.


no concerns

(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.

yes

(8) Has an IPR disclosure been filed that references this document?
If so, summarize any WG discussion and conclusion regarding the IPR
disclosures.

no

(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? 

quite solid, actually.

(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.)

no

(11) Identify any ID nits the Document Shepherd has found in this
document. (See https://www.ietf.org/tools/idnits/ and the Internet-Drafts
Checklist). Boilerplate checks are not enough; this check needs to be
thorough.

There is one note about code comments which doesn't apply
There is one outdated reference which we'll fix in auth48/etc.

(12) Describe how the document meets any required formal review
criteria, such as the MIB Doctor, media type, and URI type reviews.

There is no review required for community additions.

(13) Have all references within this document been identified as
either normative or informative?

yes

(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?

no

(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.

no

(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

(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).

IANA is being asked to add to a registry, this seems fine for this document.

(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 new registries.

(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.

no needed reviews.
2017-09-25
11 Chris Morrow Responsible AD changed to Warren Kumari
2017-09-25
11 Chris Morrow IETF WG state changed to Submitted to IESG for Publication from In WG Last Call
2017-09-25
11 Chris Morrow IESG state changed to Publication Requested
2017-09-25
11 Chris Morrow IESG process started in state Publication Requested
2017-09-25
11 Chris Morrow Intended Status changed to Informational from None
2017-09-25
11 Chris Morrow Changed document writeup
2017-09-25
11 Chris Morrow Notification list changed to Christopher Morrow <christopher.morrow@gmail.com>
2017-09-25
11 Chris Morrow Document shepherd changed to Christopher Morrow
2017-09-21
11 Bruno Decraene New version available: draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut-11.txt
2017-09-21
11 (System) New version approved
2017-09-21
11 (System)
Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Pierre Francois <pfrpfr@gmail.com>, Clarence Filsfils <cfilsfil@cisco.com>, Bruno Decraene <bruno.decraene@orange.com>, Cristel Pelsser …
Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Pierre Francois <pfrpfr@gmail.com>, Clarence Filsfils <cfilsfil@cisco.com>, Bruno Decraene <bruno.decraene@orange.com>, Cristel Pelsser <pelsser@unistra.fr>, Keyur Patel <keyur@arrcus.com>
2017-09-21
11 Bruno Decraene Uploaded new revision
2017-07-28
10 Bruno Decraene New version available: draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut-10.txt
2017-07-28
10 (System) New version approved
2017-07-28
10 (System)
Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Pierre Francois <pfrpfr@gmail.com>, Clarence Filsfils <cfilsfil@cisco.com>, Bruno Decraene <bruno.decraene@orange.com>, Cristel Pelsser …
Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Pierre Francois <pfrpfr@gmail.com>, Clarence Filsfils <cfilsfil@cisco.com>, Bruno Decraene <bruno.decraene@orange.com>, Cristel Pelsser <pelsser@unistra.fr>, Keyur Patel <keyur@arrcus.com>
2017-07-28
10 Bruno Decraene Uploaded new revision
2017-07-24
09 Peter Schoenmaker Working group last call will last 3 weeks ending August 11th, 2017
2017-07-24
09 Peter Schoenmaker IETF WG state changed to In WG Last Call from WG Document
2017-07-13
09 Peter Schoenmaker Added to session: IETF-99: grow  Mon-1740
2017-07-03
09 Bruno Decraene New version available: draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut-09.txt
2017-07-03
09 (System) New version approved
2017-07-03
09 (System)
Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Pierre Francois <pfrpfr@gmail.com>, Clarence Filsfils <cfilsfil@cisco.com>, Bruno Decraene <bruno.decraene@orange.com>, Cristel Pelsser …
Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Pierre Francois <pfrpfr@gmail.com>, Clarence Filsfils <cfilsfil@cisco.com>, Bruno Decraene <bruno.decraene@orange.com>, Cristel Pelsser <pelsser@unistra.fr>, Keyur Patel <keyur@arrcus.com>
2017-07-03
09 Bruno Decraene Uploaded new revision
2017-06-26
08 Bruno Decraene New version available: draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut-08.txt
2017-06-26
08 (System) New version approved
2017-06-26
08 (System)
Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Pierre Francois <pfrpfr@gmail.com>, Clarence Filsfils <cfilsfil@cisco.com>, Bruno Decraene <bruno.decraene@orange.com>, Cristel Pelsser …
Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Pierre Francois <pfrpfr@gmail.com>, Clarence Filsfils <cfilsfil@cisco.com>, Bruno Decraene <bruno.decraene@orange.com>, Cristel Pelsser <pelsser@unistra.fr>, Keyur Patel <keyur@arrcus.com>
2017-06-26
08 Bruno Decraene Uploaded new revision
2017-06-22
07 Bruno Decraene New version available: draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut-07.txt
2017-06-22
07 (System) New version approved
2017-06-22
07 (System)
Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: grow-chairs@ietf.org, Bruno Decraene <bruno.decraene@orange.com>, Cristel Pelsser <cristel@iij.ad.jp>, Keyur Patel <keyupate@cisco.com>, …
Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: grow-chairs@ietf.org, Bruno Decraene <bruno.decraene@orange.com>, Cristel Pelsser <cristel@iij.ad.jp>, Keyur Patel <keyupate@cisco.com>, Clarence Filsfils <cfilsfil@cisco.com>, Pierre Francois <pierre.francois@imdea.org>
2017-06-22
07 Bruno Decraene Uploaded new revision
2014-08-14
06 Pierre Francois New version available: draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut-06.txt
2014-01-28
05 Pierre Francois New version available: draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut-05.txt
2012-10-22
04 Pierre Francois New version available: draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut-04.txt
2011-12-08
03 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut-03.txt
2011-04-28
03 (System) Document has expired
2010-10-25
02 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut-02.txt
2009-10-26
01 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut-01.txt
2009-06-15
00 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-grow-bgp-gshut-00.txt