********************************************************************** IETF 85 PWE3 - Monday, November 5, 2012 - 15:20-17:20 Grand Ballroom C (85/120 min allocated) ********************************************************************** Chairs: Matthew Bocci and Andy Malis Secretary: David Sinicrope (x = slide sets NOT received as of Nov 4 17:00 Atlanta time) 1. 15 min - Agenda bash, WG Agenda and Status - Andy MALIS and Matthew BOCCI It was noted during the Note Well folks should declare IPR at EARLIEST opportunity VCCV impl survey results has been in the hands of the authors for over 100 days. Deployment surveys have a timeliness to their relevance. May need another author to wrap it up Ethernet OAM IWK in the same situation as VCCV Implementaiton survey results. It needs to be wrapped up. Discussion on IPR of ICCP on list. IPR may be more far reaching than led to believe initially. May apply to entire idea of using and inter-chassis redundancey protocol. PWE3 Status Reduction - document ready for last call, but expired. Last comment was a year ago. Author will refresh and ask for WG last call. mpls-tp-pw-status was refreshed and comments on list. VCCV for GAL draft - merged draft following intstructiosn from last IETF. Will discuss later in agenda. Dynamic MS PW and MSPW er - last called, need review, minor comments on list Chairs ask that DISCUSSes and AUTH48 requests in a TIMELY manner. No comments. 2. 10 min - Discussion on VCCV2 - Chairs and VCCV2 Authors - Draft: http://tools.ietf.org/wg/pwe3/draft-ietf-pwe3-vccv-impl-survey-results http://tools.ietf.org/wg/pwe3/draft-ietf-pwe3-vccv-for-gal -Objectives: Clarify the results of the poll, and the relation with vccv-for-gal. Andy introduced based on slide in WG Status. Yaakov (YJS): VCCV for GAL will be pushed for last call. VCCV2 document in good shape except for guidance. What will status of these documents be after last call? VCCV for GAL will be in VCCV2. If we do a bis document then both will be part of that document. VCCV for GAL 5085 update. VCCV2 is an update. But if VCCV2 obsoletes part router alert, then it obsoletes part of a document we have updated. What does the WG want??? Andy: For Router Alert there are implementations in the field. It won't go away. When update to VCCV RFC to include all modes, Router Alert must be documented for backward compatibility. YHS: Will IANA or someone note that Router Alert is not for future implementation? Stewart: Yes we should have them note it, although it won't be withdrawn. The WG should decide what it wants to do, then work with the Chairs on how to make it happen. Matthew: The first thing we want to do is standardize: 1. a method to use VCCV for GAL in new RFC 2. merge VCCV documents and sort them out into another RFC. This will obsolete 5085 & 5685. The document will also obsolete VCCV in GAL and we will also deal with Router Alert at that point. ???: What about the tutorial? YJS: If we write the document well it will be selfexplainatory. Right now it is difficult to read because of the segmentation. We can plan it this week. Andy: The tutorial idea was a list suggestion without much support. Luca: In VCCV for GAL we give the mandatory most to go forward. Then why do we need to say anything about Router Alert. We say what we go forward with and Router Alert is not mentioned. YJS: This contradicts what to do with VCCV for GAL. It should say these are two modes, not that these are the only two modes. Luca: it says these are the only two mandatory modes. Tom N: VCCV2 narrows the types down. THe whole point was to simplify resulting from the survey. YJS: VCCV2 adds a type 4 which was the point of the document. Tom: it was to narrow and add type 4 Matthew: the last IETF - standardize type 4 and as a separate exercise decide what to do with the older types 5085bis. Greg: in VCCV for GAL, don't give priorities of types, just introduce type 4. If we say it is mandatory then we need to discuss selection of types which is 5085bis. Andy: Summary: The WG agreed to the following two steps: 1. publish VCCV for GAL with reduced scope 2. create a new RFC that includes all VCCV in one place and guidance on how to use the modes, and including BFD and procedures. The new document will obsolete VCCV for GAL, 5085 and 5585. No further comments. 3. 10 min - PWE3 congestion considerations - Yaakov STEIN - Draft: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pwe3-congcons - Objectives: just a quick update, the remaining open issue, and to solicit comments on the open issue See Yaakov's slides. One comment was to redo the figures without color or such that one doesn't need to print in color. No further comments. 4. 10 min - Static pseudowire configuration checking using GAP - Sami BOUTROS for Lizhong JIN - Draft: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-jc-pwe3-static-config-check-01.txt - Objectives: asking for additional comments and potential WG adoption Sami presented. See the slides. Luca: In the refresh reduction draft, it does configuration checking and it is expandable. We need to reconcile what is in the refresh reduction and see if we can reuse it. Sami: We can do that. No further comments. 5. 10 min - LDP Extensions for Lock Instruct and Loopback of Pseudowire in MPLS Transport Profile - Mach CHEN - Draft: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dong-pwe3-mpls-tp-li-lb-02 - Objectives: present the updates to draft and get feedback from the WG Mach presented, see slides. Looking for comments and feedback and would like to accept as WG draft. YJS: Is this a PWE3 WG item or an MPLS-TP item that belongs in MPLS WG? Mach: It's for PWs. Matthew: The LI LB draft doesn't use the Cplane for loopback. YJS: Do you want to have a different mechanism for PW than LSP? Greg: You have to use a different protocol because there are different control planes. Matthew: Who's read the draft? 5-6 folks have read. More should read and comment to the list. No further comments. 6. 10 min - LDP extensions for Pseudowire Binding to LSP Tunnels - Mach CHEN - Draft: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-cao-pwe3-mpls-tp-pw-over-bidir-lsp - Objectives: present the updates and get feedbacks from the WG Mach presented, see slides. Draft is quite stable. YJS: Small wording issue. You use the terms "forward and reverse PWs". But architecture says PWs are bi-directional. Need to reword as PW forward direction, reverse direction, etc. Andy: Ask for WG adoption on the list. No further comments. 7. 10 min - Pseudowire Redundancy on S-PE - Jie DONG - Draft: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dong-pwe3-redundancy-spe-03 - Objectives: present the updates to the draft and gets feedback from the WG. Jie presented. See slides. Stewart: as one auth of MS PW draft. Constraint that TPEs weren't aware of an SPE at the other end of link. Is this maintained? Jie: No answer. Eric: Same issue as Stewart has. Master/Slave relationship may be a problem if T-PE1 does something different if connected to SPE1 vs. TPE2. Stewart: can it be designed such that we can use single segment messages with no changes. If so good, if not then do we want to make a change. Jie: doesn't require any change. Just change with configuration at SPE to provide redundancy. Luca: different methods can be chosen. If no change, can be done at SPE. Matthew: Put a statement in the draft that no change to the architecture is expected. Poll for who has read? Not that many. Take discussion to the list. No further comments. 8. 10 min - STP Application of ICCP - Mingui ZHANG - Draft: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-zhang-iccp-stp-01.txt - Objective: Call for WG adoption Mingui presented, see slides. Don Fedyck: Have seen things like this in IEEE (DRNI) Distributed Resilient Network Interconnect . Should be coordinated with IEEE. Andy: Draft was refreshed today. Recommend folks read version .02 and comment on the list. One major reference to this draft is to ICCP draft. This is under DISCUSSion because of IPR concerns. No action will be taken on this draft until that one is resolved. No further comments. One other point of business... Matthew: Transparent SONET over Packet Networks draft considered at last IETF. There were some comments on the list. We did liaise that draft to SG15. Q13/SG15 sent some comments on the draft. Authors will update the draft based on comments. WG should look at new version when published. Andy and Matthew closed the session. ********************************************************************** Overflow (Will be presented if time permits.) ********************************************************************** xx. - None. ********************************************************************** REMOTE INFORMATION FOR THE PWE3 SESSION(S) ********************************************************************** Remote Participation Info: http://www.ietf.org/meeting/85/remote-participation.html - No WebEx - Audio will be on: http://ietf85streaming.dnsalias.net/ietf/ietf852.m3u - Jabber room is "pwe3"