Protocol Action: 'TRILL: RBridge Channel Support' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-trill-rbridge-channel-08.txt)

The IESG <> Sat, 29 September 2012 15:30 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E68221F849C; Sat, 29 Sep 2012 08:30:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.535
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.535 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.064, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TwxItvdxjFIz; Sat, 29 Sep 2012 08:30:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F66121F8495; Sat, 29 Sep 2012 08:30:09 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: The IESG <>
To: IETF-Announce <>
Subject: Protocol Action: 'TRILL: RBridge Channel Support' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-trill-rbridge-channel-08.txt)
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.34
Message-ID: <>
Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2012 08:30:09 -0700
Cc: trill mailing list <>, trill 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: Sat, 29 Sep 2012 15:30:10 -0000

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'TRILL: RBridge Channel Support'
  (draft-ietf-trill-rbridge-channel-08.txt) as Proposed Standard

This document is the product of the Transparent Interconnection of Lots
of Links Working Group.

The IESG contact persons are Ralph Droms and Brian Haberman.

A URL of this Internet Draft is:

Technical Summary

The TRILL base protocol standard [RFC6325] provides for TRILL Data
messages and TRILL IS-IS messages.

This document specifies a general channel mechanism for the
transmission of other messages within an RBridge campus, such as BFD
(Bidirectional Forwarding Detection, [RFC5880]) and error messages,
RBridges and end stations that are directly connected on the same
link and between RBridges. This mechanism supports a requirement to
be able to operate with minimal configuration.

Working Group Summary

There was consensus in the working group in favor of the document.

Document Quality

The document has been carefully reviewed in the WG and by the document
shepherd. There are currently no known implementations of the channel
mechanism, but BFD and error reporting will drive their implementation.


Who is the Document Shepherd?

Erik Nordmark

Who is the Responsible Area Director?

Ralph Droms