Subject: [lisp] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-iannone-6834bis-00.txt

From: Joel Halpern <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 20 May 2018 14:17:48 -0400

This starts a 4 week implicit adoption call and explicit last call for 
the LISP Map Versioning draft revision with the purpose of moving this 
work onto the standards track.

Please read the draft.
And then speak up as to whether you agree or disagree with us sending 
this document to our AD for IETF LC and IESG review as a Proposed 
Standard RFC.

We will allow 4 weeks for this call, ending on Sunday, June 17.

Thank you,
Joel

PS: I will try to find a way to mark this suitably in the data tracker, 
but I suspect it does not have a state to reflect this.

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: I-D Action: draft-iannone-6834bis-00.txt
Date: Sun, 20 May 2018 11:09:40 -0700
From: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts 
directories.

         Title           : Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) 
Map-Versioning
         Authors         : Luigi Iannone
                           Damien Saucez
                           Olivier Bonaventure
	Filename        : draft-iannone-6834bis-00.txt
	Pages           : 19
	Date            : 2018-05-20

Abstract:
    This document describes the LISP (Locator/ID Separation Protocol)
    Map-Versioning mechanism, which provides in-packet information about
    Endpoint ID to Routing Locator (EID-to-RLOC) mappings used to
    encapsulate LISP data packets.  The proposed approach is based on
    associating a version number to EID-to-RLOC mappings and the
    transport of such a version number in the LISP-specific header of
    LISP-encapsulated packets.  LISP Map-Versioning is particularly
    useful to inform communicating Ingress Tunnel Routers (ITRs) and
    Egress Tunnel Routers (ETRs) about modifications of the mappings used
    to encapsulate packets.  The mechanism is optional and transparent to
    implementations not supporting this feature, since in the LISP-
    specific header and in the Map Records, bits used for Map-Versioning
    can be safely ignored by ITRs and ETRs that do not support or do not
    want to use the mechanism.

The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-iannone-6834bis/

There are also htmlized versions available at:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-iannone-6834bis-00
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-iannone-6834bis-00

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

_______________________________________________
I-D-Announce mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce
Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt

---

From: Dino Farinacci <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 20 May 2018 11:21:11 -0700

Note the name of the WG document should be draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6834bis-00 (note “rfc” added). 

Cheers,
Dino

> On May 20, 2018, at 11:17 AM, Joel Halpern <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> This starts a 4 week implicit adoption call and explicit last call for the LISP Map Versioning draft revision with the purpose of moving this work onto the standards track.
> 
> Please read the draft.
> And then speak up as to whether you agree or disagree with us sending this document to our AD for IETF LC and IESG review as a Proposed Standard RFC.
> 
> PS: I will try to find a way to mark this suitably in the data tracker, but I suspect it does not have a state to reflect this.
> 
> 
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
> 
> 
>        Title           : Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) Map-Versioning
>        Authors         : Luigi Iannone
>                          Damien Saucez
>                          Olivier Bonaventure
> lisp mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp

---

From: "Joel M. Halpern" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 20 May 2018 14:23:03 -0400

Yeah, if we wanted to take longer we could put in a filename change. 
But it doesn't actually matter.  (usually, we need the name right so 
folks can find the document.  I don't think that is a problem in this 
case.)  I will do what is needed to attach it to the LISP WG page.

Yours,
Joel

---

From: Alberto Rodriguez-Natal <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 20 May 2018 22:13:40 -0700

I went again through RFC6834 while I was reviewing RFC6830/33bis. I think
it can be sent to the AD.

Thanks,
Alberto

---

From: Lori Jakab <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2018 11:23:58 +0200

Hi,

I support this draft going to the AD.

Best regards,
-Lori

On 5/20/18 8:17 PM, Joel Halpern wrote:
> PS: I will try to find a way to mark this suitably in the data
> tracker, but I suspect it does not have a state to reflect this.
>
>