Re: [Isis-wg] Improving and Restructuring the Routing Area

Christian Hopps <> Thu, 19 June 2014 09:48 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBCA71A0113 for <>; Thu, 19 Jun 2014 02:48:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 81hxGiNXRwWA for <>; Thu, 19 Jun 2014 02:48:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DBD1D1A00D4 for <>; Thu, 19 Jun 2014 02:48:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id z60so1860792qgd.38 for <>; Thu, 19 Jun 2014 02:48:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:mime-version:content-type:from :in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id:references:to; bh=lHGVYYVskSuloajf5LnsHb+YhcXRqxCg3ZoOVFg+59o=; b=I5rpy9KkuPkVTA1shTOP/UjAur2RP2/iPsDgFmxNVJdIPYmO+uAmHNuJlg7uxP7irr PdTDyJlrkRUtt0IgJFd80LYaG8LTto5oou1qkcFiQ51H+hoSsq/EUA61HoeoMo5I77iO jh1x/jODRF5F9Kq8BHNADWVCYzPIM185bF2xyEZgtBuebJkjOtZdC5ILN9mnyryN12nX 37Bi5wC3O3rftdCnV4tUNWaqMiEIfyqUM4HVis4ng9hRZ96GXR7oY+UMKfT2Ewo7uWZt VVvYF+FwYFfm1/d55/YGqXYO8F/CBAfPQorNFcQ/DkbHu9MIBFDaEgeMba5WsgW9REAP Y9xA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmdxqB8zpKmX1sWopJAG2t9coAnW4VI9jY+FBElOtEAjGvbXtRFOFik96AS7jpEg8TPSYpg
X-Received: by with SMTP id r1mr5182397qat.60.1403171290944; Thu, 19 Jun 2014 02:48:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by with ESMTPSA id m13sm7742260qab.19.2014. for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 19 Jun 2014 02:48:10 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_42A0F990-4091-4ADF-B35A-D55F17A6CA23"
From: Christian Hopps <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2014 05:47:08 -0400
Message-Id: <>
References: <>
To: " list" <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
Cc: Hannes Gredler <>, Christian Hopps <>
Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] Improving and Restructuring the Routing Area
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IS-IS working group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2014 09:48:14 -0000

Hi isis-wg,

Please be aware of the ongoing discussion related to improving the Routing Area. The discussion is taking place on, so please subscribe and join in if interested.


On Jun 10, 2014, at 3:57 PM, Alia Atlas <> wrote:

> To all participants in the Routing Area,
> Adrian and I are working on improving the quality, speed, and
> experience of getting work done in the IETF Routing Area.  There are
> three initiatives that we are working: WG Draft QA, Routing Area
> specific WG chair training, and reorganizing the working groups in the
> area.
> First, we intend to use our Routing Directorate more proactively by
> introducing a Working Group Draft Quality Assurance (WG Draft QA)
> process where the same selected routing directorate member will review
> a draft during WG draft adoption and during WG last call.  The process
> will be documented on the Routing Area wiki
> (  This should allow
> directorate reviews to report technical issues that can actually get
> fixed early in the process (equivalent of bug reports) as opposed to
> just noting the concerns in the drafts (equivalent of release notes).
> Second, as was discussed during the recent IESG retreat, in addition
> to the IETF-wide WG chair training, we intend to have a series of
> training sessions for WG Chairs in the Routing Area addressing topics
> such as judging consensus, project management, motivating volunteers,
> using the datatracker (via a sandbox version that can be played
> with safely), and sharing experiences between WG chairs.
> Third, we intend to reorganize the working groups in the Routing area.
> We feel that it is important to focus on areas where there is active
> interest in standardization and to be open and able to accept new work
> into the area.  As you know, we have had several new working groups
> (nvo3, i2rs, sfc, spring) created in the last few years and we need to
> be open and able to handle more new work as it comes in.  We would
> also like to improve the signal-to-noise ratio experienced by
> participants in the different working groups and improve the quantity
> and quality of discussion and reviews.  It is likely that not all WGs
> in the Routing Area will be directly affected.
> Here is the time-line for reorganizing the WGs.
>    NOW: public discussion on about how to
>    reorganize the working groups to best meet our motivations.
>    Additional focused discussions are expected on the
> and mailing lists.
>    In Toronto: There will be meetings with the WG chairs and the
>    Routing Directorate to get the ideas described and agreed upon.
>    At the Routing Area Meeting in Toronto: Discuss the set of
>    reorganized WGs and general charter content in the Routing Area
>    meeting.
>    September 2014: Based upon the feedback, suggestions, and
>    discussion, Adrian and I finalize the reorganized WG charters.  We
>    start the internal IESG discussion and public reviews.
>    October 2014: Formal rechartering process completes.
>    In Honolulu: The new set of WGs meet.
>    After Honolulu: Adrian and I deal with any issues and charter
>    updates based upon a few months of experience.
> Here are the motivations that Adrian and I would like to be considered
> when coming up with ideas for how the WGs should be reorganized.
>    1) Move towards organizing working groups on functional
>    responsibilities rather than scoping them to specific protocols.
>    2) Split giant working groups so relevant work is done in one place
>    and there is an improved signal-to-noise ratio for participants who
>    are only interested in a slice of the current working group's work.
>    3) Create synergies for scattered functionality (example ideas:
>    OAM, FRR, traffic-engineering)
>    4) Create a DISPATCH working group for clear new idea discussion;
>    rtgwg serves some of this purpose but doesn't have a clear process
>    and isn't drawing in the new ideas.
>    5) Focus Routing Area time on design centers rather than on far
>    corner cases.
>    6) Each working group should have clear, well defined, and achievable goals.
> Noting that the Routing Area has inherited some of its WG structure
> from the sub-IP area, it is not a goal to force IP routing and MPLS
> routing to remain separated.
> The goal of this reorganization is not closing working groups.  Adrian
> and Alia are perfectly capable of closing working groups without going
> through restructuring.
> For those of you that have read this far, thank you.  Getting this 80%
> right is going to take some serious discussion and thought.  We all
> work in the Routing Area together with different perspectives.  Please
> think carefully and help us have a highly focused discussion.
> Thanks,
> Alia and Adrian
> _______________________________________________
> routing-discussion mailing list