From rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 03 07:02:11 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FxMBu-0007wx-GG; Mon, 03 Jul 2006 07:02:10 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FxMBs-0007ws-RF for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Mon, 03 Jul 2006 07:02:08 -0400 Received: from rwcrmhc15.comcast.net ([204.127.192.85]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FxMBq-00009Y-CT for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Mon, 03 Jul 2006 07:02:08 -0400 Received: from frogbits.attlabs.att.com (c-24-6-155-213.hsd1.ca.comcast.net[24.6.155.213]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc15) with ESMTP id <20060703110201m1500dejlfe>; Mon, 3 Jul 2006 11:02:05 +0000 Received: from frogbits.attlabs.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by frogbits.attlabs.att.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k63B1Nqa023778 for ; Mon, 3 Jul 2006 04:01:23 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from fenner@frogbits.attlabs.att.com) Received: (from fenner@localhost) by frogbits.attlabs.att.com (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id k63B1Nxg023777 for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Mon, 3 Jul 2006 04:01:23 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from fenner) Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2006 04:01:23 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200607031101.k63B1Nxg023777@frogbits.attlabs.att.com> From: fenner@research.att.com (Bill Fenner) To: rtg-dir@ietf.org (Routing Area Directorate) X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 515708a075ffdf0a79d1c83b601e2afd Subject: IESG agenda for 2006-07-06 telechat. X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org IESG Agenda Good approximation of what will be included in the Agenda of next Telechat (2006-07-06). Updated 2:2:22 EDT, July 3, 2006 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Administrivia 1.1 Roll Call 1.2 Bash the Agenda 1.3 Approval of the Minutes of the past telechat 1.4 List of Remaining Action Items from Last Telechat 1.5 Review of Projects 2. Protocol Actions Reviews should focus on these questions: "Is this document a reasonable basis on which to build the salient part of the Internet infrastructure? If not, what changes would make it so?" 2.1 WG Submissions 2.1.1 New Item Area Date OPS IPFIX Protocol Specification (Proposed Standard) - 1 of 5 draft-ietf-ipfix-protocol-22.txt [Open Web Ballot] Token: Dan Romascanu OPS Two-Document ballot: [Open Web Ballot] - 2 of 5 RADIUS Authentication Client MIB for IPV6 (Proposed Standard) - 2 of 5 draft-ietf-radext-rfc2618bis-04.txt RADIUS Authentication Server MIB for IPv6 (Proposed Standard) draft-ietf-radext-rfc2619bis-04.txt Token: Dan Romascanu APP Matching of Language Tags (BCP) - 3 of 5 draft-ietf-ltru-matching-15.txt [Open Web Ballot] Token: Ted Hardie APP Sieve Email Filtering -- Subaddress Extension (Proposed Standard) - 4 of 5 draft-ietf-sieve-rfc3598bis-05.txt [Open Web Ballot] Token: Lisa Dusseault INT Transport of Ethernet Frames over L2TPv3 (Proposed Standard) - 5 of 5 draft-ietf-l2tpext-pwe3-ethernet-07.txt [Open Web Ballot] Token: Jari Arkko 2.1.2 Returning Item Area Date The Extensible Markup Language (XML) RAI Configuration Access Protocol (XCAP) (Proposed Standard) - 1 of 1 draft-ietf-simple-xcap-11.txt [Open Web Ballot] Note: Note that this document was pulled from the RFC Editor queue and is returning with some changes, which are recorded in the tracker. Token: Jon Peterson 2.2 Individual Submissions 2.2.1 New Item NONE 2.2.2 Returning Item Area Date SEC IKE and IKEv2 Authentication Using ECDSA (Proposed Standard) - 1 of 1 draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-auth-ecdsa-05.txt [Open Web Ballot] Token: Russ Housley 3. Document Actions 3.1 WG Submissions Reviews should focus on these questions: "Is this document a reasonable contribution to the area of Internet engineering which it covers? If not, what changes would make it so?" 3.1.1 New Item Area Date INT Linklocal Multicast Name Resolution (LLMNR) (Informational) - 1 of 6 draft-ietf-dnsext-mdns-46.txt [Open Web Ballot] Token: Mark Townsley OPS Architecture for IP Flow Information Export (Informational) - 2 of 6 draft-ietf-ipfix-architecture-11.txt [Open Web Ballot] Token: Dan Romascanu OPS Mar 19 Two-Document ballot: [Open Web Ballot] - 3 of 6 Dynamic Authorization Client MIB (Informational) - 3 of 6 draft-ietf-radext-dynauth-client-mib-06.txt Dynamic Authorization Server MIB (Informational) draft-ietf-radext-dynauth-server-mib-06.txt Token: Dan Romascanu OPS Two-Document ballot: [Open Web Ballot] - 4 of 6 RADIUS Accounting Client MIB for IPv6 (Informational) - 4 of 6 draft-ietf-radext-rfc2620bis-04.txt RADIUS Accounting Server MIB for IPv6 (Informational) draft-ietf-radext-rfc2621bis-04.txt Token: Dan Romascanu RAI RTP Payload Format for H.263 using RFC2190 to Historic status (Informational) - 5 of 6 draft-ietf-avt-rfc2190-to-historic-06.txt [Open Web Ballot] Note: PROTO shepherd: Colin Perkins csp@csperkins.org Token: Cullen Jennings Problem Statement for Network-based INT Localized Mobility Management (Informational) - 6 of 6 draft-ietf-netlmm-nohost-ps-04.txt [Open Web Ballot] Token: Jari Arkko 3.1.2 Returning Item NONE 3.2 Individual Submissions Via AD Reviews should focus on these questions: "Is this document a reasonable contribution to the area of Internet engineering which it covers? If not, what changes would make it so?" 3.2.1 New Item Area Date GEN Apr 11 A Process Experiment in Normative Reference Handling (Experimental) - 1 of 4 draft-klensin-norm-ref-01.txt [Open Web Ballot] Note: RFC 3933 process experiment Token: Brian Carpenter GEN May 9 Requirements for IETF Technical Publication Service (Informational) - 2 of 4 draft-mankin-pub-req-09.txt [Open Web Ballot] Token: Brian Carpenter GEN May 16 IETF Operational Notes (Experimental) - 3 of 4 draft-alvestrand-ipod-02.txt [Open Web Ballot] Note: RFC 3933 process experiment Token: Brian Carpenter Cryptographic Token Key Initialization SEC Protocol Version 1.0 (Informational) - 4 of 4 draft-nystrom-ct-kip-01.txt [Open Web Ballot] Token: Russ Housley 3.2.2 Returning Item NONE 3.3 Individual Submissions Via RFC Editor The IESG will use RFC 3932 responses: 1) The IESG has not found any conflict between this document and IETF work; 2) The IESG thinks that this work is related to IETF work done in WG , but this does not prevent publishing; 3) The IESG thinks that publication is harmful to work in WG and recommends not publishing at this time; 4) The IESG thinks that this document violates the IETF procedures for and should therefore not be published without IETF review and IESG approval; 5) The IESG thinks that this document extends an IETF protocol in a way that requires IETF review and should therefore not be published without IETF review and IESG approval. Other matters may be recorded in comments to be passed on to the RFC Editor as community review of the document. 3.3.1 New Item Area Date Extensible Authentication Protocol Method for INT Shared-secret Authentication and Key Establishment (EAP-SAKE) (Informational) - 1 of 1 draft-vanderveen-eap-sake-02.txt [Open Web Ballot] Token: Jari Arkko 3.3.2 Returning Item NONE 3.3.3 For Action Area Date RAI Media Server Control Markup Language (MSCML) and Protocol (Informational) - 1 of 1 draft-vandyke-mscml-09.txt Token: Brian Carpenter 4. Working Group Actions 4.1 WG Creation 4.1.1 Proposed for IETF Review NONE 4.1.2 Proposed for Approval NONE 4.2 WG Rechartering 4.2.1 Under evaluation for IETF Review NONE 4.2.2 Proposed for Approval Area Date INT Jun 13 Mobility for IPv4 (mip4) - 1 of 2 Token: Jari TSV Jun 12 Datagram Congestion Control Protocol (dccp) - 2 of 2 Token: Lars 5. IAB News We Can Use 6. Management Issues 7. Working Group News From rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org Thu Jul 06 17:11:34 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Fyb8I-0004MY-Nm; Thu, 06 Jul 2006 17:11:34 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Fyb8H-0004MT-RY for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Thu, 06 Jul 2006 17:11:33 -0400 Received: from mail-red.research.att.com ([192.20.225.110]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Fyb8F-0002f4-GB for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Thu, 06 Jul 2006 17:11:33 -0400 Received: from bright.research.att.com (bright.research.att.com [135.207.20.189]) by mail-blue.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03B74147B68 for ; Thu, 6 Jul 2006 17:11:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from fenner@localhost) by bright.research.att.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.10/Submit) id k66LBRSZ032181; Thu, 6 Jul 2006 17:11:27 -0400 From: Bill Fenner Message-Id: <200607062111.k66LBRSZ032181@bright.research.att.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII To: rtg-dir@ietf.org Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2006 17:11:27 -0400 Versions: dmail (linux) 2.7/makemail 2.14 X-Spam-Score: 0.5 (/) X-Scan-Signature: dbb8771284c7a36189745aa720dc20ab Subject: Experts Request for CAPWAP X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org The CAPWAP WG needs some advice. It's trying to decide between two options: - Using seperate UDP ports for control traffic vs. encapsulated data - Using a single UDP port and a small multiplexing header It turns out there are *all sorts* of sub issues involved, so it's not really "pick one". One of the questions that they're interested in having answered is QoS classification: is it reasonable to expect that if you want to give traffic different queueing behavior, that you can just set a DSCP and be done, or should you be programming classifiers (and obviously classifiers can classify on UDP ports but not all classifiers will be able to look at the 4th byte of the UDP payload (e.g.)). I'm forwarding a message from Dan Romascanu, the ops area AD responsible for CAPWAP, asking for help. I'd like to ask the routing directorate this: - If someone has been following the CAPWAP work, and has a sense of what the underlying issues are here, summarize for the group. - Is there someone interested in looking into this and helping to inform the group? In the "routing protocols" sense, this isn't a routing area issue at all; things like packet classification etc. have usually been Internet area issues, but Dan asked us for help so I wanted to see if the expertise was around. [You can find the PDF file that was attached to Dan's email at http://rtg.ietf.org/~fenner/tmp/muxflux.pdf - I didn't want to clog up inboxes with it.] Thanks, Bill ----- Begin forwarded message: From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" Subject: Experts Request for CAPWAP Date: Thu, Jul 6 14:52:41 To: "Mark Townsley (townsley)" , "Jari Arkko" , "Ross Callon" , "Bill Fenner" Cc: , Hi, Following the 7/6 telechat, here is the request to provide assistance to the CAPWAP WG in order to overcome their deadlock concerning the multiplexing of control and data frames in the capwap specification. It would be very useful if the Internet Area and Routing Area can delegate one expert each to advice CAPWAP starting with the Montreal meeting. The document in discussion is draft-ietf-capwap-protocol-specification-02. However, there is no need for a full review of this document but for guidance on the specific question of distinguishing control and data frames in CAPWAP. The choices that were discussed were the usage of separate UDP ports or a separate header in the protocol. Initially, after the initial CAPWAP protocol selection it was suggested to treat the data-path independent of control path and leave it out of the CAPWAP protocol definition itself. This is similar to solutions used by protocols like SIP and FTP and allows for simpler classification in intermediate routers for security and QoS purposes. The second solution came later proposing use of mux header citing like in L2TP citing several reasons related to less complexity in handling and correlating data for NAT Translation, simpler firewall rules, simpler channel binding between discover, control and data. Also note that the configurations supported by CAPWAP lead to the need of supporting split-MAC with tunneled forwarding of data to a centralized AC. The Split-MAC treatment of data-traffic has led to questions about its protection, encapsulation and multiplexing with control stream. The CAPWAP WG need a recommendation for a better choice between the two solutions that will take into consideration: - the necessity of distinguishing between the data channel (non-DTLS, may be DTLS protected) and the DTLS-encapsulated control channel - need for classification and inspection for QoS marking - cost of deployment over existing routing and bridging infrastructure, including modifications in the software stacks of existing routing and reprogramming of firewall devices - need to conserve QoS on WTP-AC links - not clear if is split MAC viable solution for both cases Details of the discussion and references are being detailed in the mail prepared by the WG chairs and distributed to the whole IESG and in the attached file. Thanks and Regards, Dan [Attachment: muxflux.pdf, application/octet-stream] ----- End forwarded message: ----- Begin forwarded message: Subject: Re: Experts Request for CAPWAP Date: Thu, Jul 6 15:46:44 To: dromasca@avaya.com Cc: townsley@cisco.com jari.arkko@piuha.net rcallon@juniper.net david.kessens@nokia.com I've downloaded the capwap wg archives and subscribed the archiver to the mailing list; I find the lurker interface to be much better than pipermail for searching for old threads. http://rtg.ietf.org/lurker/list/capwap.en.html The threads that the muxflux pdf point to are: http://rtg.ietf.org/lurker/thread/20060322.165321.958ab973.en.html [NAT-T] http://rtg.ietf.org/lurker/thread/20060505.114306.e2000749.en.html [To mux or not to mux?] http://rtg.ietf.org/lurker/thread/20060515.220123.2f03f052.en.html [Mux redux] http://rtg.ietf.org/lurker/thread/20060518.162324.bfbf5559.en.html [Cost-benefit analysis: mux vs multiport] http://rtg.ietf.org/lurker/thread/20060608.234230.a3fbc258.en.html [New mux header for CAPWAP] http://rtg.ietf.org/lurker/thread/20060609.221348.af6a6381.en.html [Capwap transport analysis: QoS vs multiport] http://rtg.ietf.org/lurker/thread/20060614.002724.56bc9b85.en.html [Reasonably bounding our QoS ambitions for our base protocol] There's a *lot* of discussion there, and I haven't been able to really understand how the PDF file distills it too much. Bill ----- End forwarded message: From rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 10 13:42:10 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Fzzlq-0000xb-Cy; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 13:42:10 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Fzzlp-0000xT-6g for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 13:42:09 -0400 Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Fzzln-00072a-VU for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 13:42:09 -0400 Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] helo=[127.0.0.1]) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.60 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1Fzzln-000NRy-Fq for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 17:42:07 +0000 Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 10:42:07 -0700 From: Alex Zinin X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <676236668.20060710104207@psg.com> To: rtg-dir@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 1.2 (+) X-Scan-Signature: 08170828343bcf1325e4a0fb4584481c Subject: RTG-DIR Dinner X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Alex Zinin List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org Bill kindly asked if I can help schedule the dinner. I kindly agreed. Suggested times: Mon: 20:00pm Tue: 20:00pm Wed: 19:00pm Please send your preference here. -- Alex http://www.psg.com/~zinin From rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 10 13:52:09 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FzzvV-0001kt-6j; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 13:52:09 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FzzvU-0001kj-8E for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 13:52:08 -0400 Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FzzvT-0000Eo-1J for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 13:52:08 -0400 Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] helo=[127.0.0.1]) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.60 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1FzzvS-000OJP-DS; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 17:52:06 +0000 Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 10:52:05 -0700 From: Alex Zinin X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <792120591.20060710105205@psg.com> To: Alex Zinin In-Reply-To: <676236668.20060710104207@psg.com> References: <676236668.20060710104207@psg.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 1.2 (+) X-Scan-Signature: de4f315c9369b71d7dd5909b42224370 Cc: rtg-dir@ietf.org Subject: Re: RTG-DIR Dinner X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Alex Zinin List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org > Bill kindly asked if I can help schedule the dinner. > I kindly agreed. > Suggested times: > Mon: 20:00pm Good > Tue: 20:00pm Good > Wed: 19:00pm Possible conflict Alex > Please send your preference here. From rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 10 14:18:07 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G00Kd-000530-22; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 14:18:07 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G00Kb-00052v-VY for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 14:18:05 -0400 Received: from gateout01.mbox.net ([165.212.64.21]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G00Ka-00044J-Mr for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 14:18:05 -0400 Received: from gateout01.mbox.net (gateout01.mbox.net [165.212.64.21]) by gateout01.mbox.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C8071D94; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 18:17:58 +0000 (GMT) Received: from gateout01.mbox.net [127.0.0.1] by gateout01.mbox.net via mtad (C8.MAIN.3.27X) with ESMTP id 148kgJsR60330Mo1; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 18:17:57 GMT Received: from gateout01.mbox.net [127.0.0.1] by gateout01.mbox.net via mtad (C8.MAIN.3.27X) with ESMTP id 133kgJsR40183Mo1; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 18:17:55 GMT X-USANET-Routed: 2 gwsout-vs R:localhost:1825 Received: from GW2.EXCHPROD.USA.NET [165.212.116.254] by gateout01.mbox.net via smtad (C8.MAIN.3.27X); Mon, 10 Jul 2006 18:17:55 GMT X-USANET-Source: 165.212.116.254 IN skh@nexthop.com GW2.EXCHPROD.USA.NET X-USANET-MsgId: XID354kgJsR48404Xo1 Received: from VS4.EXCHPROD.USA.NET ([10.116.208.142]) by GW2.EXCHPROD.USA.NET with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 10 Jul 2006 12:17:53 -0600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 12:17:06 -0600 Message-ID: <6F44D7F6B24A8F4DA0AB46C9BE924F0205C0FF54@VS4.EXCHPROD.USA.NET> In-Reply-To: <792120591.20060710105205@psg.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: RTG-DIR Dinner Thread-Index: AcakSZUA5C7LuNyFTz6p9r5Mn+SVCAAAes2Q From: "Susan Hares" To: "Alex Zinin" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Jul 2006 18:17:53.0816 (UTC) FILETIME=[29406180:01C6A44D] X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: e1e48a527f609d1be2bc8d8a70eb76cb Cc: rtg-dir@ietf.org Subject: RE: RTG-DIR Dinner X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org Gang: I'm not at IETF. Due to a trip to India caught a bug, my immune system is compromised. =20 My apologies for the short notice, but my Doctor's encouragement matches my CEO note. Sue -----Original Message----- From: Alex Zinin [mailto:zinin@psg.com]=20 Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 1:52 PM To: Alex Zinin Cc: rtg-dir@ietf.org Subject: Re: RTG-DIR Dinner > Bill kindly asked if I can help schedule the dinner. > I kindly agreed. > Suggested times: > Mon: 20:00pm Good > Tue: 20:00pm Good > Wed: 19:00pm Possible conflict Alex > Please send your preference here. From rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 10 14:22:05 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G00OT-0000hc-Jo; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 14:22:05 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G00OR-0000h7-1F for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 14:22:03 -0400 Received: from [80.86.78.228] (helo=smtp.testbed.se) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G00OP-0004lt-N9 for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 14:22:03 -0400 Received: from [132.219.26.219] (helo=[132.219.26.219]) by fw.testbed.se with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.43) id 1G00OM-0002WO-Ig; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 20:21:59 +0200 Message-ID: <44B29AC3.5070008@pi.se> Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 20:21:55 +0200 From: Loa Andersson Organization: Acreo AB User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (Windows/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alex Zinin References: <676236668.20060710104207@psg.com> <792120591.20060710105205@psg.com> In-Reply-To: <792120591.20060710105205@psg.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -1.4 (-) X-Spam-Report: -1.4 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 52e1467c2184c31006318542db5614d5 Cc: rtg-dir@ietf.org Subject: Re: RTG-DIR Dinner X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org Alex Zinin wrote: >> Bill kindly asked if I can help schedule the dinner. >> I kindly agreed. > >> Suggested times: > >> Mon: 20:00pm > Good works >> Tue: 20:00pm > Good good >> Wed: 19:00pm > Possible conflict the pleanary goes on up to 19.30, but anything after that is fine > > Alex > >> Please send your preference here. > > > > -- Loa Andersson Principal Networking Architect Acreo AB phone: +46 8 632 77 14 Isafjordsgatan 22 mobile: +46 739 81 21 64 Kista, Sweden email: loa.andersson@acreo.se loa@pi.se From rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 10 15:06:09 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G0157-0002OO-HO; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 15:06:09 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G0156-0002OJ-Nf for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 15:06:08 -0400 Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G0155-0001M7-Fr for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 15:06:08 -0400 Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] helo=[127.0.0.1]) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.60 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1G0154-0004Ro-W4; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 19:06:07 +0000 Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 12:06:03 -0700 From: Alex Zinin X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <155976765.20060710120603@psg.com> To: "Susan Hares" In-Reply-To: <6F44D7F6B24A8F4DA0AB46C9BE924F0205C0FF54@VS4.EXCHPROD.USA.NET> References: <792120591.20060710105205@psg.com> <6F44D7F6B24A8F4DA0AB46C9BE924F0205C0FF54@VS4.EXCHPROD.USA.NET> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 1.2 (+) X-Scan-Signature: 50a516d93fd399dc60588708fd9a3002 Cc: rtg-dir@ietf.org Subject: Re: RTG-DIR Dinner X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Alex Zinin List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org Get well soon, Sue!!!! -- Alex http://www.psg.com/~zinin Monday, July 10, 2006, 11:17:06 AM, Susan Hares wrote: > Gang: > I'm not at IETF. Due to a trip to India caught a bug, my immune system > is compromised. > My apologies for the short notice, but my Doctor's encouragement matches > my CEO note. > Sue > -----Original Message----- > From: Alex Zinin [mailto:zinin@psg.com] > Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 1:52 PM > To: Alex Zinin > Cc: rtg-dir@ietf.org > Subject: Re: RTG-DIR Dinner >> Bill kindly asked if I can help schedule the dinner. >> I kindly agreed. >> Suggested times: >> Mon: 20:00pm > Good >> Tue: 20:00pm > Good >> Wed: 19:00pm > Possible conflict > Alex >> Please send your preference here. From rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 10 18:40:23 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G04QR-0000r5-IG; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 18:40:23 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G04QQ-0000r0-Kn for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 18:40:22 -0400 Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G04QO-000660-D9 for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 18:40:22 -0400 Received: from dpapadimitriou by psg.com with local (Exim 4.60 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1G04QN-000L6w-PA; Mon, 10 Jul 2006 22:40:19 +0000 To: zinin@psg.com (Alex Zinin) Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 22:40:19 +0000 (GMT) In-Reply-To: <676236668.20060710104207@psg.com> X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL8] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: From: Dimitri Papadimitriou X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 93238566e09e6e262849b4f805833007 Cc: rtg-dir@ietf.org Subject: Re: RTG-DIR Dinner X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org alex, all preference for wednesday after the plenary (19:30) - dimitri. > Bill kindly asked if I can help schedule the dinner. > I kindly agreed. > > Suggested times: > > Mon: 20:00pm > Tue: 20:00pm > Wed: 19:00pm > > Please send your preference here. > > -- > Alex > http://www.psg.com/~zinin > > > From rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jul 11 10:14:54 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G0J0o-00007r-MF; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 10:14:54 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G0J0n-00007b-Mt for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 10:14:53 -0400 Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G0J0m-0005aA-Du for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 10:14:53 -0400 Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] helo=[127.0.0.1]) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.60 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1G0J0k-0000R2-1F for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 14:14:50 +0000 Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 07:14:50 -0700 From: Alex Zinin X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <310638399.20060711071450@psg.com> To: rtg-dir@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <676236668.20060710104207@psg.com> References: <676236668.20060710104207@psg.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 1.2 (+) X-Scan-Signature: 79899194edc4f33a41f49410777972f8 Subject: Re: RTG-DIR Dinner X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Alex Zinin List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org Let's lock it on Tue night (tonight). Ross, Bill, please confirm. -- Alex http://www.psg.com/~zinin Monday, July 10, 2006, 10:42:07 AM, Alex Zinin wrote: > Bill kindly asked if I can help schedule the dinner. > I kindly agreed. > Suggested times: > Mon: 20:00pm > Tue: 20:00pm > Wed: 19:00pm > Please send your preference here. From rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jul 11 12:17:27 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G0KvP-0002TB-NU; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 12:17:27 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G0KvP-0002T6-El for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 12:17:27 -0400 Received: from [80.86.78.228] (helo=smtp.testbed.se) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G0KvO-0004NF-4w for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 12:17:27 -0400 Received: from [132.219.30.209] (helo=[132.219.30.209]) by fw.testbed.se with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.43) id 1G0KvL-0000zb-Lq; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 18:17:24 +0200 Message-ID: <44B3CF10.1010805@pi.se> Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 18:17:20 +0200 From: Loa Andersson Organization: Acreo AB User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (Windows/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alex Zinin References: <676236668.20060710104207@psg.com> <310638399.20060711071450@psg.com> In-Reply-To: <310638399.20060711071450@psg.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -1.4 (-) X-Spam-Report: -1.4 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: ea4ac80f790299f943f0a53be7e1a21a Cc: rtg-dir@ietf.org Subject: Re: RTG-DIR Dinner X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org Alex, thanks for organizing :) I just had a look at the routing directorate membership list and you are not on it ;) Ross and Bill, I propose that we include Alex in the routing area directorate. And while I'm at it I'd also like to see Bob Hinden on the directorate (have not talked to him). /Loa Alex Zinin wrote: > Let's lock it on Tue night (tonight). > Ross, Bill, please confirm. > -- Loa Andersson Principal Networking Architect Acreo AB phone: +46 8 632 77 14 Isafjordsgatan 22 mobile: +46 739 81 21 64 Kista, Sweden email: loa.andersson@acreo.se loa@pi.se From rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 17 07:02:04 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G2QrU-0006wP-GW; Mon, 17 Jul 2006 07:02:04 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G2QrT-0006wD-Bp for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Mon, 17 Jul 2006 07:02:03 -0400 Received: from sccrmhc11.comcast.net ([63.240.77.81]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G2QrT-0004Xa-2P for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Mon, 17 Jul 2006 07:02:03 -0400 Received: from frogbits.attlabs.att.com (c-24-6-155-213.hsd1.ca.comcast.net[24.6.155.213]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc11) with ESMTP id <200607171102020110089cv5e>; Mon, 17 Jul 2006 11:02:02 +0000 Received: from frogbits.attlabs.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by frogbits.attlabs.att.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k6HB1Nrh074054 for ; Mon, 17 Jul 2006 04:01:23 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from fenner@frogbits.attlabs.att.com) Received: (from fenner@localhost) by frogbits.attlabs.att.com (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id k6HB1MHa074053 for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Mon, 17 Jul 2006 04:01:22 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from fenner) Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2006 04:01:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200607171101.k6HB1MHa074053@frogbits.attlabs.att.com> From: fenner@research.att.com (Bill Fenner) To: rtg-dir@ietf.org (Routing Area Directorate) X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: df9edf1223802dd4cf213867a3af6121 Subject: IESG agenda for 2006-07-20 telechat. X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org IESG Agenda Good approximation of what will be included in the Agenda of next Telechat (2006-07-20). Updated 2:2:26 EDT, July 17, 2006 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Administrivia 1.1 Roll Call 1.2 Bash the Agenda 1.3 Approval of the Minutes of the past telechat 1.4 List of Remaining Action Items from Last Telechat 1.5 Review of Projects 2. Protocol Actions Reviews should focus on these questions: "Is this document a reasonable basis on which to build the salient part of the Internet infrastructure? If not, what changes would make it so?" 2.1 WG Submissions 2.1.1 New Item Area Date The Internet IP Security PKI Profile of SEC IKEv1/ISAKMP, IKEv2, and PKIX (Proposed Standard) - 1 of 2 draft-ietf-pki4ipsec-ikecert-profile-10.txt [Open Web Ballot] Token: Russ Housley RAI RTP payload format for the G.729.1 audio codec (Proposed Standard) - 2 of 2 draft-ietf-avt-rtp-g729-scal-wb-ext-06.txt [Open Web Ballot] Note: PROTO Shepherd is Colin Perkins csp@csperkins.org Token: Cullen Jennings 2.1.2 Returning Item NONE 2.2 Individual Submissions 2.2.1 New Item NONE 2.2.2 Returning Item Area Date SEC RIPv2 Cryptographic Authentication (Proposed Standard) - 1 of 1 draft-rja-ripv2-auth-05.txt [Open Web Ballot] Token: Russ Housley 3. Document Actions 3.1 WG Submissions Reviews should focus on these questions: "Is this document a reasonable contribution to the area of Internet engineering which it covers? If not, what changes would make it so?" 3.1.1 New Item Area Date INT Linklocal Multicast Name Resolution (LLMNR) (Informational) - 1 of 2 draft-ietf-dnsext-mdns-46.txt [Open Web Ballot] Token: Mark Townsley Analysis of Threats Motivating DomainKeys SEC Identified Mail (DKIM) (Informational) - 2 of 2 draft-ietf-dkim-threats-03.txt [Open Web Ballot] Note: PROTO Shepherd: Stephen Farrell Token: Russ Housley 3.1.2 Returning Item NONE 3.2 Individual Submissions Via AD Reviews should focus on these questions: "Is this document a reasonable contribution to the area of Internet engineering which it covers? If not, what changes would make it so?" 3.2.1 New Item Area Date RTG Two-Document ballot: [Open Web Ballot] - 1 of 4 Distance Vector Multicast Routing Protocol (Informational) - 1 of 4 draft-ietf-idmr-dvmrp-v3-11.txt Distance Vector Multicast Routing Protocol Applicability Statement (Informational) draft-ietf-idmr-dvmrp-v3-as-01.txt Note: Security Considerations needs update before IETF Last Call Token: Bill Fenner Domain-based Email Authentication Using SEC Public Keys Advertised in the DNS (DomainKeys) (Historic) - 2 of 4 draft-delany-domainkeys-base-05.txt [Open Web Ballot] Token: Russ Housley GEN Apr 11 A Process Experiment in Normative Reference Handling (Experimental) - 3 of 4 draft-klensin-norm-ref-01.txt [Open Web Ballot] Note: RFC 3933 process experiment Token: Brian Carpenter Cryptographic Token Key Initialization SEC Protocol Version 1.0 (Informational) - 4 of 4 draft-nystrom-ct-kip-01.txt [Open Web Ballot] Token: Russ Housley 3.2.2 Returning Item Area Date GEN May 9 Requirements for IETF Technical Publication Service (Informational) - 1 of 1 draft-mankin-pub-req-10.txt [Open Web Ballot] Token: Brian Carpenter 3.3 Individual Submissions Via RFC Editor The IESG will use RFC 3932 responses: 1) The IESG has not found any conflict between this document and IETF work; 2) The IESG thinks that this work is related to IETF work done in WG , but this does not prevent publishing; 3) The IESG thinks that publication is harmful to work in WG and recommends not publishing at this time; 4) The IESG thinks that this document violates the IETF procedures for and should therefore not be published without IETF review and IESG approval; 5) The IESG thinks that this document extends an IETF protocol in a way that requires IETF review and should therefore not be published without IETF review and IESG approval. Other matters may be recorded in comments to be passed on to the RFC Editor as community review of the document. 3.3.1 New Item Area Date INT The EAP-PSK Protocol: a Pre-Shared Key EAP Method (Experimental) - 1 of 1 draft-bersani-eap-psk-11.txt [Open Web Ballot] Token: Jari Arkko 3.3.2 Returning Item NONE 4. Working Group Actions 4.1 WG Creation 4.1.1 Proposed for IETF Review NONE 4.1.2 Proposed for Approval NONE 4.2 WG Rechartering 4.2.1 Under evaluation for IETF Review Area Date APP Jul 10 Calendaring and Scheduling Standards Simplification (calsify) - 1 of 1 Token: Lisa 4.2.2 Proposed for Approval Area Date INT Jun 13 Mobility for IPv4 (mip4) - 1 of 1 Token: Jari 5. IAB News We Can Use 6. Management Issues 7. Working Group News From rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jul 19 13:57:17 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G3GIP-0005Ie-KA; Wed, 19 Jul 2006 13:57:17 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G3GIO-0005IZ-VU for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Wed, 19 Jul 2006 13:57:16 -0400 Received: from colo-dns-ext1.juniper.net ([207.17.137.57]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G3GIM-00027S-Cl for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Wed, 19 Jul 2006 13:57:16 -0400 Received: from merlot.juniper.net (merlot.juniper.net [172.17.27.10]) by colo-dns-ext1.juniper.net (8.11.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id k6JHvBX99353 for ; Wed, 19 Jul 2006 10:57:13 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from rcallon@juniper.net) Received: from rcallon-lt1.juniper.net (rcallon-lt1.jnpr.net [172.28.36.176]) by merlot.juniper.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id k6JHv5g62946 for ; Wed, 19 Jul 2006 10:57:06 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from rcallon@juniper.net) Message-Id: <5.0.0.25.2.20060719135116.02954eb0@zircon.juniper.net> X-Sender: rcallon@zircon.juniper.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0 Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2006 13:57:00 -0400 To: rtg-dir@ietf.org From: Ross Callon Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7d33c50f3756db14428398e2bdedd581 Subject: Volunteer sought, for review of draft-ietf-l1vpn-framework-03.txt X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org Routing Directorate members; You will recall that Bill and I have been threatening to make greater use of the routing directorate, including (but not limited to) helping with AD review of various documents that have been submitted for publication. With this in mind, I would like to ask for a volunteer to do a detailed review of: Framework and Requirements for Layer 1 Virtual Private Networks draft-ietf-l1vpn-framework-03.txt I have taken a look at this today, and to me it seems to be somewhat incomplete. However, it would be very valuable if a reviewer could give an independent review and try to come up with a relatively complete list of what, if anything, is missing from the document. Thanks, Ross From rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jul 25 12:57:07 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G5QDT-00065W-Cx; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 12:57:07 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G5QDS-00065D-7F for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 12:57:06 -0400 Received: from colo-dns-ext1.juniper.net ([207.17.137.57]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G5QDQ-0006wV-QE for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 12:57:06 -0400 Received: from merlot.juniper.net (merlot.juniper.net [172.17.27.10]) by colo-dns-ext1.juniper.net (8.11.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id k6PGv1X92856; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 09:57:01 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from rcallon@juniper.net) Received: from rcallon-lt1.juniper.net ([172.23.1.167]) by merlot.juniper.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id k6PGutg50396; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 09:56:55 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from rcallon@juniper.net) Message-Id: <5.0.0.25.2.20060725121622.035c5b20@zircon.juniper.net> X-Sender: rcallon@zircon.juniper.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0 Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 12:54:15 -0400 To: rtg-dir@ietf.org From: Ross Callon Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: a7d6aff76b15f3f56fcb94490e1052e4 Cc: rcallon@juniper.net, fenner@research.att.com Subject: draft-ietf-ccamp-automesh-01.txt X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org I am looking for one or two routing directorate volunteers to review draft-ietf-ccamp-automesh-01.txt, and/or am looking for comments on this document. To me there seems to be two issues that are worth looking at (although of course a reviewer may find other things to comment on). One question involves the advisability of piggybacking information on IGPs. One the one hand in this case the information being piggybacked is relatively small in volume, and is also quite stable. Thus the extra load on the IGP seems minimal. On the other hand, piggybacking on IGPs in general seems to have two issues that make it more iffy compared to piggybacking on BGP: (i) IGPs have very tight timing constraints (if a link goes down you want your IGP to respond quickly, and you also want all routers in an area to update their routing databases and forwarding tables relatively close to at the same time to minimize the persistence of microloops); (ii) If the amount of information grows to the point that it is bothersome, with BGP the L3VPN framework describes how to partition it into multiple instances, each of which is only run between those routers which actually need to know the information being distributed, with IGPs (OSPF and IS-IS) the same information is flooded to all routers in the area, including those that don't need it, and it is not obvious to me how to cleanly partition two instances of an IGP in the same network; (I have also heard a complaint that IGPs refresh their LSAs periodically, and thus the piggybacked information also needs to be refreshed -- I however would expect that refreshes would be rare enough, and sufficiently spread over time, that this would not be a significant extra load). The other issue that I notice is that the security considerations section of this document is null ("No new security issues are raised in this document"). While this may be true (I can't think of any new security considerations -- if the IGP is compromised then you are in real trouble with or without this enhancement), if anyone can think of more to say here this might be a good idea. In fact, it might not be a bad idea to have a "security considerations with IGPs" document that we could just refer to (volunteers to write this one?). Thanks, Ross From rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jul 25 14:18:17 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G5RU1-0004h4-Ah; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 14:18:17 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G5RU0-0004gz-4T for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 14:18:16 -0400 Received: from colo-dns-ext1.juniper.net ([207.17.137.57]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G5RTw-0002M3-Ok for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 14:18:16 -0400 Received: from merlot.juniper.net (merlot.juniper.net [172.17.27.10]) by colo-dns-ext1.juniper.net (8.11.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id k6PIIAX94183 for ; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 11:18:12 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from rcallon@juniper.net) Received: from rcallon-lt1.juniper.net ([172.23.1.167]) by merlot.juniper.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id k6PII4g70528 for ; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 11:18:04 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from rcallon@juniper.net) Message-Id: <5.0.0.25.2.20060725141059.0353beb0@zircon.juniper.net> X-Sender: rcallon@zircon.juniper.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0 Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 14:15:48 -0400 To: rtg-dir@ietf.org From: Ross Callon Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 30ac594df0e66ffa5a93eb4c48bcb014 Subject: Review of draft-ietf-forces-protocol-08.txt X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org I am looking for one or two brave people to volunteer to review: "ForCES Protocol Specification", draft-ietf-forces-protocol-08.txt. Warning, This is 116 pages long (81 without the appendices), so any volunteers will certainly be greatly appreciated! Thanks, Ross From rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jul 25 14:22:01 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G5RXd-0005Am-1r; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 14:22:01 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G5RXc-0005Ab-5p for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 14:22:00 -0400 Received: from gateout02.mbox.net ([165.212.64.22]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G5RXa-0003N0-SU for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 14:22:00 -0400 Received: from gateout02.mbox.net (gateout02.mbox.net [165.212.64.22]) by gateout02.mbox.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90AFE30FB; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 18:21:55 +0000 (GMT) Received: from gateout02.mbox.net [127.0.0.1] by gateout02.mbox.net via mtad (C8.MAIN.3.27X) with ESMTP id 853kgysV20166Mo2; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 18:21:54 GMT Received: from gateout02.mbox.net [127.0.0.1] by gateout02.mbox.net via mtad (C8.MAIN.3.27X) with ESMTP id 852kgysVz0010Mo2; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 18:21:52 GMT X-USANET-Routed: 2 gwsout-vs R:localhost:1825 Received: from GW2.EXCHPROD.USA.NET [165.212.116.254] by gateout02.mbox.net via smtad (C8.MAIN.3.27X); Tue, 25 Jul 2006 18:21:52 GMT X-USANET-Source: 165.212.116.254 IN skh@nexthop.com GW2.EXCHPROD.USA.NET X-USANET-MsgId: XID080kgysV18490Xo2 Received: from VS4.EXCHPROD.USA.NET ([10.116.208.141]) by GW2.EXCHPROD.USA.NET with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 25 Jul 2006 12:21:48 -0600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 12:21:26 -0600 Message-ID: <6F44D7F6B24A8F4DA0AB46C9BE924F0205FDE45E@VS4.EXCHPROD.USA.NET> In-Reply-To: <5.0.0.25.2.20060725141059.0353beb0@zircon.juniper.net> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Review of draft-ietf-forces-protocol-08.txt Thread-Index: AcawFriSM6ZzAIiuRrmmXOZ6kmobtAAAFALQ From: "Susan Hares" To: "Ross Callon" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Jul 2006 18:21:48.0403 (UTC) FILETIME=[3145C430:01C6B017] X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 9466e0365fc95844abaf7c3f15a05c7d Cc: Subject: RE: Review of draft-ietf-forces-protocol-08.txt X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org Ross: I've reviewed this specification for the Forces group. I suspect that makes me a "non-valid" reviewer at this time? Otherwise, I've read it before and can read again. Sue -----Original Message----- From: Ross Callon [mailto:rcallon@juniper.net]=20 Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2006 2:16 PM To: rtg-dir@ietf.org Subject: Review of draft-ietf-forces-protocol-08.txt I am looking for one or two brave people to volunteer to review: "ForCES Protocol Specification", draft-ietf-forces-protocol-08.txt. Warning, This is 116 pages long (81 without the appendices), so any volunteers will certainly be greatly appreciated! Thanks, Ross From rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jul 25 16:50:20 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G5Tr9-0006JI-Mp; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:50:20 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G5Tr8-0006Hq-AD for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:50:18 -0400 Received: from smail.alcatel.fr ([62.23.212.165]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G5Tr6-0003AB-QS for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:50:18 -0400 Received: from bemail05.netfr.alcatel.fr (bemail05.netfr.alcatel.fr [155.132.251.11]) by smail.alcatel.fr (8.13.4/8.13.4/Debian-3sarge1) with ESMTP id k6PKoGp0022009; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 22:50:16 +0200 In-Reply-To: <5.0.0.25.2.20060725121622.035c5b20@zircon.juniper.net> To: Ross Callon MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.5 September 26, 2003 Message-ID: From: Dimitri.Papadimitriou@alcatel.be Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 22:50:12 +0200 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on BEMAIL05/BE/ALCATEL(Release 5.0.13aHF163 | June 23, 2005) at 07/25/2006 22:50:14, Serialize complete at 07/25/2006 22:50:14 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.51 on 155.132.180.81 X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Scan-Signature: b5d20af10c334b36874c0264b10f59f1 Cc: fenner@research.att.com, rcallon@juniper.net, rtg-dir@ietf.org Subject: Re: draft-ietf-ccamp-automesh-01.txt X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org hi ross i have a couple points on this doc. o) the document does introduce a field to facilitate LSP identification (name) as part of the routing extension i am concerned by the introduction of a new LSP identification format / mechanism - if no pointer to RFC 3209 is provided; o) the document mentions that the number of mesh groups is limited but potentially (depending on encoding) provides for binary encoding for 2^32-1 groups - how this can be controlled such as to prevent the resulting behaviour you have described o) the document mentions that "The TE-MESH-GROUP TLV is OPTIONAL and must at most appear once in a OSPF Router Information LSA or ISIS Router Capability TLV." but for addition/removal it mentions "conversely, if the LSR leaves a mesh-group the corresponding entry will be removed from the TE-MESH-GROUP TLV." what are these "entries" referring to - that there is a top-level TE-MESH-GROUP TLV with multiple sub-TLVs (but the document mentions "No sub-TLV is currently defined for the TE-mesh-group TLV") ? o) the document mentions that "Note that both operations can be performed in the context of a single refresh." but this is not a refresh anymore this becomes a trigger/update o) it would be valuable to state exact OSPF applicability since the Router_Cap document (used by the present doc) covers both v2 and v3 o) the term "fairly static" is relative to the OSPF refresh timer ? (i would ask to refer to periodicity instead) much thanks, - dimitri. Ross Callon 25/07/2006 18:54 To: rtg-dir@ietf.org cc: rcallon@juniper.net, fenner@research.att.com Subject: draft-ietf-ccamp-automesh-01.txt I am looking for one or two routing directorate volunteers to review draft-ietf-ccamp-automesh-01.txt, and/or am looking for comments on this document. To me there seems to be two issues that are worth looking at (although of course a reviewer may find other things to comment on). One question involves the advisability of piggybacking information on IGPs. One the one hand in this case the information being piggybacked is relatively small in volume, and is also quite stable. Thus the extra load on the IGP seems minimal. On the other hand, piggybacking on IGPs in general seems to have two issues that make it more iffy compared to piggybacking on BGP: (i) IGPs have very tight timing constraints (if a link goes down you want your IGP to respond quickly, and you also want all routers in an area to update their routing databases and forwarding tables relatively close to at the same time to minimize the persistence of microloops); (ii) If the amount of information grows to the point that it is bothersome, with BGP the L3VPN framework describes how to partition it into multiple instances, each of which is only run between those routers which actually need to know the information being distributed, with IGPs (OSPF and IS-IS) the same information is flooded to all routers in the area, including those that don't need it, and it is not obvious to me how to cleanly partition two instances of an IGP in the same network; (I have also heard a complaint that IGPs refresh their LSAs periodically, and thus the piggybacked information also needs to be refreshed -- I however would expect that refreshes would be rare enough, and sufficiently spread over time, that this would not be a significant extra load). The other issue that I notice is that the security considerations section of this document is null ("No new security issues are raised in this document"). While this may be true (I can't think of any new security considerations -- if the IGP is compromised then you are in real trouble with or without this enhancement), if anyone can think of more to say here this might be a good idea. In fact, it might not be a bad idea to have a "security considerations with IGPs" document that we could just refer to (volunteers to write this one?). Thanks, Ross From rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jul 25 23:19:01 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G5ZvI-0004gz-MW; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 23:19:00 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G5ZvH-0004XF-DO for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 23:18:59 -0400 Received: from colo-dns-ext2.juniper.net ([207.17.137.64]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G5ZvF-0001pP-2A for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 23:18:59 -0400 Received: from merlot.juniper.net (merlot.juniper.net [172.17.27.10]) by colo-dns-ext2.juniper.net (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id k6Q3Iu1Z072183; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 20:18:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from rcallon@juniper.net) Received: from rcallon-lt1.juniper.net ([172.23.1.167]) by merlot.juniper.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id k6Q3Isg72531; Tue, 25 Jul 2006 20:18:54 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from rcallon@juniper.net) Message-Id: <5.0.0.25.2.20060725230514.049ae980@zircon.juniper.net> X-Sender: rcallon@zircon.juniper.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0 Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 23:16:12 -0400 To: "Susan Hares" , From: Ross Callon In-Reply-To: <6F44D7F6B24A8F4DA0AB46C9BE924F0205FDE45E@VS4.EXCHPROD.USA. NET> References: <5.0.0.25.2.20060725141059.0353beb0@zircon.juniper.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 8abaac9e10c826e8252866cbe6766464 Cc: Subject: RE: Review of draft-ietf-forces-protocol-08.txt X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org At 12:21 PM 7/25/2006 -0600, Susan Hares wrote: >Ross: > >I've reviewed this specification for the Forces group. I suspect that >makes me a "non-valid" reviewer at this time? > >Otherwise, I've read it before and can read again. I think that your review would be valuable. Given that you have been keep track of the effort over time, you might have an easier time than most of us at absorbing the full content of over 100 pages of spec. If we can get a second reviewer who is more "neutral" (has not been involved in the work) then this would be useful also. Thanks, Ross >-----Original Message----- >From: Ross Callon [mailto:rcallon@juniper.net] >Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2006 2:16 PM >To: rtg-dir@ietf.org >Subject: Review of draft-ietf-forces-protocol-08.txt > >I am looking for one or two brave people to volunteer to >review: "ForCES Protocol Specification", >draft-ietf-forces-protocol-08.txt. > >Warning, This is 116 pages long (81 without the appendices), >so any volunteers will certainly be greatly appreciated! > >Thanks, Ross From rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jul 26 08:26:06 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G5iSk-0005oY-KT; Wed, 26 Jul 2006 08:26:06 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G5iSj-0005oL-5S for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Wed, 26 Jul 2006 08:26:05 -0400 Received: from gateout01.mbox.net ([165.212.64.21]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G5iSg-0000d9-Qz for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Wed, 26 Jul 2006 08:26:05 -0400 Received: from gateout01.mbox.net (gateout01.mbox.net [165.212.64.21]) by gateout01.mbox.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97343228C; Wed, 26 Jul 2006 12:26:01 +0000 (GMT) Received: from gateout01.mbox.net [127.0.0.1] by gateout01.mbox.net via mtad (C8.MAIN.3.27X) with ESMTP id 432kgZmZ80061Mo1; Wed, 26 Jul 2006 12:26:00 GMT Received: from gateout01.mbox.net [127.0.0.1] by gateout01.mbox.net via mtad (C8.MAIN.3.27X) with ESMTP id 427kgZmZ60495Mo1; Wed, 26 Jul 2006 12:25:57 GMT X-USANET-Routed: 2 gwsout-vs R:localhost:1825 Received: from GW1.EXCHPROD.USA.NET [165.212.116.254] by gateout01.mbox.net via smtad (C8.MAIN.3.27X); Wed, 26 Jul 2006 12:25:57 GMT X-USANET-Source: 165.212.116.254 IN skh@nexthop.com GW1.EXCHPROD.USA.NET X-USANET-MsgId: XID174kgZmZ68769Xo1 Received: from VS4.EXCHPROD.USA.NET ([10.116.208.141]) by GW1.EXCHPROD.USA.NET with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 26 Jul 2006 06:25:57 -0600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 06:25:55 -0600 Message-ID: <6F44D7F6B24A8F4DA0AB46C9BE924F02060434EA@VS4.EXCHPROD.USA.NET> In-Reply-To: <5.0.0.25.2.20060725230514.049ae980@zircon.juniper.net> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Review of draft-ietf-forces-protocol-08.txt Thread-Index: AcawYj9ePlPb7FbBQeadZX/8freDuAAS4+zA From: "Susan Hares" To: "Ross Callon" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Jul 2006 12:25:57.0174 (UTC) FILETIME=[A55C8560:01C6B0AE] X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: c1c65599517f9ac32519d043c37c5336 Cc: Subject: RE: Review of draft-ietf-forces-protocol-08.txt X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org I'll commit to this by 8/11. I've got to clear off old work first. Will that be soon enough. Sue -----Original Message----- From: Ross Callon [mailto:rcallon@juniper.net]=20 Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2006 11:16 PM To: Susan Hares; rtg-dir@ietf.org Subject: RE: Review of draft-ietf-forces-protocol-08.txt At 12:21 PM 7/25/2006 -0600, Susan Hares wrote: >Ross: > >I've reviewed this specification for the Forces group. I suspect that >makes me a "non-valid" reviewer at this time? > >Otherwise, I've read it before and can read again. I think that your review would be valuable. Given that you have been keep track of the effort over time, you might have an easier time than most of us at absorbing the full content of over 100 pages of spec. If we can get a second reviewer who is more "neutral" (has not been involved in the work) then this would be useful also. Thanks, Ross >-----Original Message----- >From: Ross Callon [mailto:rcallon@juniper.net] >Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2006 2:16 PM >To: rtg-dir@ietf.org >Subject: Review of draft-ietf-forces-protocol-08.txt > >I am looking for one or two brave people to volunteer to >review: "ForCES Protocol Specification", >draft-ietf-forces-protocol-08.txt. > >Warning, This is 116 pages long (81 without the appendices), >so any volunteers will certainly be greatly appreciated! > >Thanks, Ross From rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jul 26 21:15:05 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G5uSv-0008WF-F2; Wed, 26 Jul 2006 21:15:05 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G5uSt-0008UW-Ip for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Wed, 26 Jul 2006 21:15:03 -0400 Received: from colo-dns-ext1.juniper.net ([207.17.137.57]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G5uSr-0006cq-75 for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Wed, 26 Jul 2006 21:15:03 -0400 Received: from merlot.juniper.net (merlot.juniper.net [172.17.27.10]) by colo-dns-ext1.juniper.net (8.11.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id k6R1EsX18019; Wed, 26 Jul 2006 18:14:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from rcallon@juniper.net) Received: from rcallon-lt1.juniper.net ([172.23.1.167]) by merlot.juniper.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id k6R1Eig04741; Wed, 26 Jul 2006 18:14:48 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from rcallon@juniper.net) Message-Id: <5.0.0.25.2.20060726211341.035c62f0@zircon.juniper.net> X-Sender: rcallon@zircon.juniper.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0 Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 21:14:28 -0400 To: "Susan Hares" From: Ross Callon In-Reply-To: <6F44D7F6B24A8F4DA0AB46C9BE924F02060434EA@VS4.EXCHPROD.USA. NET> References: <5.0.0.25.2.20060725230514.049ae980@zircon.juniper.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 769a46790fb42fbb0b0cc700c82f7081 Cc: rtg-dir@ietf.org Subject: RE: Review of draft-ietf-forces-protocol-08.txt X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org At 06:25 AM 7/26/2006 -0600, Susan Hares wrote: >I'll commit to this by 8/11. I've got to clear off old work first. >Will that be soon enough. > >Sue Yes. Thanks. Ross >-----Original Message----- >From: Ross Callon [mailto:rcallon@juniper.net] >Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2006 11:16 PM >To: Susan Hares; rtg-dir@ietf.org >Subject: RE: Review of draft-ietf-forces-protocol-08.txt > >At 12:21 PM 7/25/2006 -0600, Susan Hares wrote: > >Ross: > > > >I've reviewed this specification for the Forces group. I suspect that > >makes me a "non-valid" reviewer at this time? > > > >Otherwise, I've read it before and can read again. > >I think that your review would be valuable. Given that you have been >keep track of the effort over time, you might have an easier time than >most of us at absorbing the full content of over 100 pages of spec. > >If we can get a second reviewer who is more "neutral" (has not been >involved in the work) then this would be useful also. > >Thanks, Ross > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Ross Callon [mailto:rcallon@juniper.net] > >Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2006 2:16 PM > >To: rtg-dir@ietf.org > >Subject: Review of draft-ietf-forces-protocol-08.txt > > > >I am looking for one or two brave people to volunteer to > >review: "ForCES Protocol Specification", > >draft-ietf-forces-protocol-08.txt. > > > >Warning, This is 116 pages long (81 without the appendices), > >so any volunteers will certainly be greatly appreciated! > > > >Thanks, Ross From rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 31 07:02:12 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G7VXH-0000lt-Sh; Mon, 31 Jul 2006 07:02:11 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G7VXH-0000lo-CO for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Mon, 31 Jul 2006 07:02:11 -0400 Received: from sccrmhc11.comcast.net ([204.127.200.81]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G7VXF-0005fw-1B for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Mon, 31 Jul 2006 07:02:11 -0400 Received: from frogbits.attlabs.att.com (c-24-6-155-213.hsd1.ca.comcast.net[24.6.155.213]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc11) with ESMTP id <20060731110202011008hkh3e>; Mon, 31 Jul 2006 11:02:08 +0000 Received: from frogbits.attlabs.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by frogbits.attlabs.att.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k6VB1Npw031023 for ; Mon, 31 Jul 2006 04:01:23 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from fenner@frogbits.attlabs.att.com) Received: (from fenner@localhost) by frogbits.attlabs.att.com (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id k6VB1NEa031022 for rtg-dir@ietf.org; Mon, 31 Jul 2006 04:01:23 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from fenner) Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 04:01:23 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200607311101.k6VB1NEa031022@frogbits.attlabs.att.com> From: fenner@research.att.com (Bill Fenner) To: rtg-dir@ietf.org (Routing Area Directorate) X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 0bb031f3a6fb29f760794ac9bf1997ae Subject: IESG agenda for 2006-08-03 telechat. X-BeenThere: rtg-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: rtg-dir-bounces@ietf.org IESG Agenda Good approximation of what will be included in the Agenda of next Telechat (2006-08-03). Updated 2:2:41 EDT, July 31, 2006 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Administrivia 1.1 Roll Call 1.2 Bash the Agenda 1.3 Approval of the Minutes of the past telechat 1.4 List of Remaining Action Items from Last Telechat 1.5 Review of Projects 2. Protocol Actions Reviews should focus on these questions: "Is this document a reasonable basis on which to build the salient part of the Internet infrastructure? If not, what changes would make it so?" 2.1 WG Submissions 2.1.1 New Item Area Date Management Information Base for the Session RAI Initiation Protocol (SIP) (Proposed Standard) - 1 of 4 draft-ietf-sip-mib-11.txt [Open Web Ballot] Note: PROTO Shepherd is Dean Willis Token: Cullen Jennings The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) RAI Conference Bridge Transcoding Model (Proposed Standard) - 2 of 4 draft-ietf-sipping-transc-conf-03.txt [Open Web Ballot] Token: Jon Peterson The Internet IP Security PKI Profile of IKEv1 SEC /ISAKMP, IKEv2, and PKIX (Proposed Standard) - 3 of 4 draft-ietf-pki4ipsec-ikecert-profile-10.txt [Open Web Ballot] Token: Russ Housley OPS Observed DNS Resolution Misbehavior (BCP) - 4 of 4 draft-ietf-dnsop-bad-dns-res-06.txt [Open Web Ballot] Note: Proto shepherd: Rob Austein Token: David Kessens 2.1.2 Returning Item NONE 2.2 Individual Submissions 2.2.1 New Item NONE 2.2.2 Returning Item Area Date SEC IKE and IKEv2 Authentication Using ECDSA (Proposed Standard) - 1 of 1 draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-auth-ecdsa-06.txt [Open Web Ballot] Note: An updated draft was submitted since this was on the agenda. It contains several minor corrections; the biggest is to assign values for IKEv2 as well as IKE. Token: Russ Housley 3. Document Actions 3.1 WG Submissions Reviews should focus on these questions: "Is this document a reasonable contribution to the area of Internet engineering which it covers? If not, what changes would make it so?" 3.1.1 New Item Area Date Framework for Transcoding with the Session RAI Initiation Protocol (SIP) (Informational) - 1 of 2 draft-ietf-sipping-transc-framework-04.txt [Open Web Ballot] Token: Jon Peterson SEC Lightweight OCSP Profile for High Volume Environments (Informational) - 2 of 2 draft-ietf-pkix-lightweight-ocsp-profile-06.txt [Open Web Ballot] Token: Russ Housley 3.1.2 Returning Item Area Date A Framework for Inter-Domain Multiprotocol RTG Label Switching Traffic Engineering (Informational) - 1 of 1 draft-ietf-ccamp-inter-domain-framework-05.txt [Open Web Ballot] Token: Ross Callon 3.2 Individual Submissions Via AD Reviews should focus on these questions: "Is this document a reasonable contribution to the area of Internet engineering which it covers? If not, what changes would make it so?" 3.2.1 New Item Area Date Domain-based Email Authentication Using SEC Public Keys Advertised in the DNS (DomainKeys) (Historic) - 1 of 4 draft-delany-domainkeys-base-06.txt [Open Web Ballot] Token: Russ Housley GEN CellML Media Type (Informational) - 2 of 4 draft-miller-media-type-cellml-05.txt [Open Web Ballot] Token: Lisa Dusseault Mounting Web Distributed Authoring and APP Versioning (WebDAV) servers (Informational) - 3 of 4 draft-reschke-webdav-mount-05.txt [Open Web Ballot] Note: Added to agenda to discuss with W3C liaisons Token: Lisa Dusseault SEC Multiple Authentication Exchanges in IKEv2 (Experimental) - 4 of 4 draft-eronen-ipsec-ikev2-multiple-auth-02.txt [Open Web Ballot] Token: Russ Housley 3.2.2 Returning Item Area Date GEN Apr 11 A Process Experiment in Normative Reference Handling (Experimental) - 1 of 1 draft-klensin-norm-ref-01.txt [Open Web Ballot] Note: RFC 3933 process experiment Token: Brian Carpenter 3.3 Individual Submissions Via RFC Editor The IESG will use RFC 3932 responses: 1) The IESG has not found any conflict between this document and IETF work; 2) The IESG thinks that this work is related to IETF work done in WG , but this does not prevent publishing; 3) The IESG thinks that publication is harmful to work in WG and recommends not publishing at this time; 4) The IESG thinks that this document violates the IETF procedures for and should therefore not be published without IETF review and IESG approval; 5) The IESG thinks that this document extends an IETF protocol in a way that requires IETF review and should therefore not be published without IETF review and IESG approval. Other matters may be recorded in comments to be passed on to the RFC Editor as community review of the document. 3.3.1 New Item Area Date OPS DSL Forum Vendor-Specific RADIUS Attributes (Informational) - 1 of 1 draft-mammoliti-radius-dsl-vsa-03.txt [Open Web Ballot] Token: Dan Romascanu 3.3.2 Returning Item NONE 4. Working Group Actions 4.1 WG Creation 4.1.1 Proposed for IETF Review NONE 4.1.2 Proposed for Approval NONE 4.2 WG Rechartering 4.2.1 Under evaluation for IETF Review Area Date TSV Jul 27 TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions (tcpm) - 1 of 1 Token: Lars 4.2.2 Proposed for Approval Area Date TSV Jul 5 Robust Header Compression (rohc) - 1 of 1 Token: Magnus 5. IAB News We Can Use 6. Management Issues 7. Working Group News