Protocol Action: 'Private Line Emulation over Packet Switched Networks' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-pals-ple-14.txt)

The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org> Thu, 19 December 2024 19:38 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
Subject: Protocol Action: 'Private Line Emulation over Packet Switched Networks' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-pals-ple-14.txt)
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <173463709495.132426.275776776153816898@dt-datatracker-65f549669d-lhv7k>
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2024 11:38:14 -0800
Message-ID-Hash: HN74JL467LXYF6R2SVBDA4P34BQDWZ32
CC: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, agmalis@gmail.com, draft-ietf-pals-ple@ietf.org, gunter@vandevelde.cc, pals-chairs@ietf.org, pals@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/Xd6RaG7WhL-dGEOH-U03UOrJUBM>

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Private Line Emulation over Packet Switched Networks'
  (draft-ietf-pals-ple-14.txt) as Proposed Standard

This document is the product of the Pseudowire And LDP-enabled Services
Working Group.

The IESG contact persons are Gunter Van de Velde, Jim Guichard and John
Scudder.

A URL of this Internet-Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pals-ple/




Technical Summary

   This document describes methods and requirements for implementing the
   encapsulation of high-speed bit-streams into virtual private wire
   services (VPWS) over packet switched networks (PSN) providing
   complete signal transport transparency.

Working Group Summary

   Was there anything in the WG process that is worth noting?
   For example, was there controversy about particular points 
   or were there decisions where the consensus was
   particularly rough? 


There was a relatively small response to WGLC but this is a specialist technology
and in the light of this the number of responses was satisfactory.
There were no points of controversy in the LC process.

Document Quality

   Are there existing implementations of the protocol?  Have a 
   significant number of vendors indicated their plan to
   implement the specification?  Are there any reviewers that
   merit special mention as having done a thorough review,
   e.g., one that resulted in important changes or a
   conclusion that the document had no substantive issues?  If
   there was a MIB Doctor, Media Type, or other Expert Review,
   what was its course (briefly)?  In the case of a Media Type
   Review, on what date was the request posted?

This protocol is in the shipping code of one major vendor with deployments underway.
There is a demo implementation by another major vendor that was exhibited at an
industry conference.

The technology acts as a carrier for IEEE, Fibre Channel and ITU-T protocols
and we do not foresee any adverse interaction. This WG has considerable experience
at transporting third-party physical and datalink protocols over IETF technologies.

The WG believes that the SRv6 technology will be reviewed during the normal IETF review
process so nothing special is needed.


Personnel

   The Document Shepherd for this document is Stewart Bryant. The
   Responsible Area Director is Gunter Van de Velde.

IANA Note

  	Version Changed - Review Needed

Protocol Action: 'Private Line Emulation over Pac… The IESG