Document Action: 'Pseudowire Redundancy' to Informational RFC (draft-ietf-pwe3-redundancy-09.txt)

The IESG <> Fri, 13 July 2012 16:26 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0681121F878B; Fri, 13 Jul 2012 09:26:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.564
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.564 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.035, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aktQYlbJlBAd; Fri, 13 Jul 2012 09:26:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0863521F8798; Fri, 13 Jul 2012 09:26:34 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: The IESG <>
To: IETF-Announce <>
Subject: Document Action: 'Pseudowire Redundancy' to Informational RFC (draft-ietf-pwe3-redundancy-09.txt)
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.30p3
Message-ID: <>
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 09:26:34 -0700
Cc: pwe3 mailing list <>, pwe3 chair <>, RFC Editor <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IETF announcement list. No discussions." <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 16:26:35 -0000

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Pseudowire Redundancy'
  (draft-ietf-pwe3-redundancy-09.txt) as Informational RFC

This document is the product of the Pseudowire Emulation Edge to Edge
Working Group.

The IESG contact persons are Stewart Bryant and Adrian Farrel.

A URL of this Internet Draft is:

Technical Summary

   This document describes a framework comprised of a number of
   scenarios and associated requirements for pseudowire (PW) redundancy.
   A set of redundant PWs is configured between provider edge (PE) nodes
   in single segment PW applications, or between Terminating PE nodes in
   Multi-Segment PW applications.  In order for the PE/T-PE nodes to
   indicate the preferred PW to use for forwarding PW packets to one
   another, a new PW status is required to indicate the preferential
   forwarding status of active or standby for each PW in the redundancy

Working Group Summary

   This document represents the consensus of the
   working group.

Document Quality

   There are no concerns regarding the document's


   Andy Malis is the Document Shepherd for this document.
   Stewart Bryant is the Responsible Area Director.

RFC Editor Note

In the Security Section (5)

This document requires extensions to the Label Distribution Protocol
(LDP) that are needed for protecting pseudowires.  These will inherit
at least the same security properties as LDP [RFC5036] and the PW
control protocol [RFC4447].
The PW redundancy method described in this RFC will require
an extension to the PW control protocol [RFC4447], which in turn is
carried over the Label Distribution Protocol (LDP) [RFC5036].
This PW redundancy method will therefore inherit the
security mechanisms of the version of LDP implemented in
the PEs.