Re: [Isis-wg] [OSPF] Link-State Routing WG charter

"Dearlove, Christopher (UK)" <chris.dearlove@baesystems.com> Thu, 25 January 2018 16:33 UTC

Return-Path: <chris.dearlove@baesystems.com>
X-Original-To: isis-wg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: isis-wg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9A941242F7; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 08:33:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.928
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.928 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, 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 K9TfUzr1ryDQ; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 08:33:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ukmta2.baesystems.com (ukmta2.baesystems.com [20.133.0.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B10471241F3; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 08:33:48 -0800 (PST)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="5.46,412,1511827200"; d="scan'208,217"; a="47702508"
Received: from unknown (HELO baemasmds017.greenlnk.net) ([10.15.207.104]) by ukmta2.baesystems.com with ESMTP; 25 Jan 2018 16:33:47 +0000
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="5.46,412,1511827200"; d="scan'208,217"; a="33423060"
Received: from glkas4160v.greenlnk.net (HELO localhost) ([10.109.225.6]) by baemasmds017.greenlnk.net with ESMTP; 25 Jan 2018 16:33:47 +0000
Received: from GLKXM0025.GREENLNK.net (10.109.8.245) by GLKXM0022.GREENLNK.net (10.109.8.242) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1034.26; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 16:33:46 +0000
Received: from GLKXH0004V.GREENLNK.net (10.109.2.35) by GLKXM0025.GREENLNK.net (10.109.8.245) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_0, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA_P256) id 15.1.1034.26 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 16:33:46 +0000
Received: from GLKXM0002V.GREENLNK.net ([169.254.5.245]) by GLKXH0004V.GREENLNK.net ([10.109.2.35]) with mapi id 14.03.0361.001; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 16:33:46 +0000
From: "Dearlove, Christopher (UK)" <chris.dearlove@baesystems.com>
To: Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>, "isis-wg@ietf.org" <isis-wg@ietf.org>, OSPF List <ospf@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [OSPF] Link-State Routing WG charter
Thread-Index: AQHTlTepv+WJAhUJkEaT0aceMS5KaaOEyPKA
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 16:33:47 +0000 (GMT)
Message-ID: <B31EEDDDB8ED7E4A93FDF12A4EECD30DE67312F3@GLKXM0002V.GREENLNK.net>
References: <CAG4d1rfR5Y85T_wNSVXB0WL4C8THyAkgevr6DyH1xcO=R+sOVQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAG4d1rfR5Y85T_wNSVXB0WL4C8THyAkgevr6DyH1xcO=R+sOVQ@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.109.62.6]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_B31EEDDDB8ED7E4A93FDF12A4EECD30DE67312F3GLKXM0002VGREEN_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
do-mail-from: chris.dearlove@baesystems.com
do-rcpt-to: akatlas@gmail.com,isis-wg@ietf.org,ospf@ietf.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/isis-wg/3esRZwx94SCxr66t9gWwMhGfRd8>
Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] [OSPF] Link-State Routing WG charter
X-BeenThere: isis-wg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IS-IS working group <isis-wg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/isis-wg>, <mailto:isis-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/isis-wg/>
List-Post: <mailto:isis-wg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:isis-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg>, <mailto:isis-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 16:33:53 -0000

Of course the routing area has created another link state routing protocol in the recent past, OLSRv2 (RFC 7181) in the MANET WG (not listed for coordination). And if any work ever re-surfaces (beyond the existing three experimental RFCs) on adaption of OSPF for wireless networks (MANETs) then that may be relevant. Also, at the moment, the MANET WG is responsible for OLSRv2 maintenance, but none is currently ongoing, the MANETWG  is almost entirely working on DLEP (a reason I’m pretty much observing only).

--
Christopher Dearlove
Senior Principal Engineer
BAE Systems Applied Intelligence Laboratories
__________________________________________________________________________

T:  +44 3300 467500  |  E: chris.dearlove@baesystems.com<mailto:chris.dearlove@baesystems.com>

BAE Systems Applied Intelligence, Chelmsford Technology Park, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, Essex CM2 8HN.
www.baesystems.com/ai<http://www.baesystems.com/ai>
BAE Systems Applied Intelligence Limited
Registered in England & Wales No: 01337451
Registered Office: Surrey Research Park, Guildford, Surrey, GU2 7YP

From: OSPF [mailto:ospf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Alia Atlas
Sent: 24 January 2018 17:19
To: isis-wg@ietf.org; OSPF List
Subject: [OSPF] Link-State Routing WG charter


!! PHISHING ALERT !!
This email has been sent from an account outside of the BAE Systems network.

Is it from someone you already know? Is the email business related and in context with your job role? If not it could be a phishing email.
If it is asking you to click on a link or open an attached word document it could be particularly dangerous.

Don't get hooked, it could result in your machine or the wider network becoming infected.

For information regarding Red Flags that you can look out for in emails you receive click here<http://ws-sites.ent.baesystems.com/sites/HOSECStdsLibrary/StandardsLibrary/Everyone/Red%20Flags.pdf>df>.

If you feel the email is suspicious, please follow this process<http://ws-sites.ent.baesystems.com/sites/HOSECStdsLibrary/StandardsLibrary/Everyone/Dealing%20With%20Suspicious%20Emails.pdf>df>.


Here is the proposed charter for the LSR working group
that will be created from the SPF and ISIS working groups.

This is scheduled for internal review for the IESG telechat on February 8.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-lsr/

The Link-State Routing (LSR) Working Group is chartered to document current protocol implementation practices and improvements, protocol usage scenarios, maintenance and extensions of link-state routing interior gateway protocols (IGPs) with a focus on IS-IS, OSPFv2, and OSPFv3.  The LSR Working Group is formed by merging the isis and ospf WGs and will take on all their existing adopted work at the time of chartering.

IS-IS is an IGP specified and standardized by ISO through ISO 10589:2002 and additional RFC standards with extensions to support IP that has been deployed in the Internet for decades.  For the IS-IS protocol, LSR’s work is focused on IP routing, currently based on the agreement in RFC 3563 with ISO/JTC1/SC6. The LSR WG will interact with other standards bodies that have responsible for standardizing IS-IS.

OSPFv2 [RFC 2328 and extensions], is an IGP that has been deployed in the Internet for decades. OSPFv3 [RFC5340 and extensions] provides OSPF for IPv6 and IPv4 [RFC5838] which can be delivered over IPv6 or IPv4 [RFC 7949].

The LSR Working Group will generally manage its specific work items by milestones agreed with the responsible Area Director.

The following topics are expected to be an initial focus:

1) Improving OSPF support for IPv6 and extensions using OSPFv3 LSA Extendibility.
2) Extensions needed for Segment Routing and associated architectural changes
3) YANG models for IS-IS, OSPFv2, and OSPFv3 and extensions
4) Extensions for source-destination routing [draft-ietf-rtgwg-dst-src-routing]
5) Potentially, extensions to better support specific network topologies such as
ones commonly used in data centers.

The Link-State Routing (LSR) Working Group will coordinate with other working groups, such as RTGWG, SPRING, MPLS, TEAS, V6OPS, and 6MAN, to understand the need for extensions and to confirm that the planned work meets the needs.  LSR can coordinate with CCAMP and BIER on their extensions to the LSR IGPs as useful.  LSR may coordinate with other WGs as needed.

Regards,
Alia
********************************************************************
This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended
recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender.
You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or
distribute its contents to any other person.
********************************************************************