[Anima] draft-richardson-anima-l2-friendly-acp-00

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Mon, 27 July 2020 01:50 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: anima@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: anima@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 606063A15DD for <anima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 18:50:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Q-Fivr-GsLhL for <anima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 18:50:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 366273A15DC for <anima@ietf.org>; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 18:50:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 513F838A62 for <anima@ietf.org>; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 21:30:11 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 3SY70n4jBJDu for <anima@ietf.org>; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 21:30:10 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08EA438A61 for <anima@ietf.org>; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 21:30:10 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22C571AA for <anima@ietf.org>; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 21:50:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: anima@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <159580250482.3724.5712671711646203180@ietfa.amsl.com>
References: <159580250482.3724.5712671711646203180@ietfa.amsl.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2020 21:50:40 -0400
Message-ID: <28284.1595814640@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/anima/wDR6Snfrifo_aRK8hjwxP0FIMks>
Subject: [Anima] draft-richardson-anima-l2-friendly-acp-00
X-BeenThere: anima@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Autonomic Networking Integrated Model and Approach <anima.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/anima>, <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/anima/>
List-Post: <mailto:anima@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima>, <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2020 01:50:46 -0000

internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote:
    > Name:		draft-richardson-anima-l2-friendly-acp
    > Title:		Autonomic Control Plane challenges for Layer-Two Switched Networks
    > Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-richardson-anima-l2-friendly-acp/

    > Abstract:
    > This document details the challenges with building an Autonomic
    > Control Plane on Campus/Enterprise networks which are built out of
    > layer-two (Ethernet) switched technologies.

    > This document does not propose a specific solution as yet, but
    > details a number of possibilities, and what it would take to
    > standardize each possibility.

Hi, I have marked this document as replacing the previous document, richardson-anima-ipv6-lldp.
This document is now more of a requirements discussion.

Joel Halpern has pointed just now in email that it appears to be work that
the IEEE should do.  He may be right.  In which case, this may be a
requirements document to send through a liason.

On the other hand, this is basically an IPv6-over-FOO document, and we have
historically done those.

At this point, please take section 4 (Possibilities) as open thoughts.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-