Re: Possible Shutdown of L3VPN

[Thomas Nadeau <[e-mail]>]

	If there are only a few drafts left, then the other option is to punt the remaining drafts over to MPLS too.

	--Tom


On Jan 22, 2012, at 8:18 AM, Henderickx, Wim (Wim) wrote:

> Ben, i just want to ensure we close the work as you pointed out before considering closing the WG
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ben Niven-Jenkins [mailto:[e-mail]] 
> Sent: zondag 22 januari 2012 10:59
> To: Henderickx, Wim (Wim)
> Cc: Marshall Eubanks; L3VPN; Stewart Bryant (stbryant)
> Subject: Re: Possible Shutdown of L3VPN
> 
> Wim,
> 
> On 22 Jan 2012, at 06:11, Henderickx, Wim (Wim) wrote:
> 
>> Why don't we keep the WG open until the WG drafts are finished?
> 
> Because there's nothing like a deadline to motivate people :-)
> 
> If it's decided to wind the WG down, what I would expect is that it wouldn't just happen overnight but that we would produce a 'plan' for closure within a reasonable timeframe (say 6 months) where we would aim to finish what we have on our plate first, if possible.
> 
> Regarding WG drafts, currently we have 3:
> -> draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-wildcards, which has just gone through WG LC and about to be sent to IESG for publication
> -> draft-ietf-l3vpn-acceptown-community, which we will initiate a WG LC on shortly
> -> draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-bidir, which the authors say needs another revision before being ready for WG LC
> 
> So getting those finished relatively quickly before closure seems achievable.
> 
> I'd personally also like the combined extranet draft produced before closure but again I'd expect that should be possible relatively quickly too.
> 
> Ben
> 
>> We can probably do this on the mailing list and don't need a face2face meeting, but as such you keep the WG alive until the work is done.
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Marshall Eubanks
>> Sent: zaterdag 21 januari 2012 14:38
>> To: L3VPN; Stewart Bryant (stbryant); [e-mail]
>> Subject: Possible Shutdown of L3VPN
>> 
>> Dear WG members;
>> 
>> With the Paris meeting coming up, we felt that you should know that
>> there has been serious discussion of shutting down the L3VPN working
>> group, both because of a decline of work in the group, and because of the
>> expected new work to come from the DC effort is likely to require a
>> new working group with a different focus.
>> 
>> If the WG were to be wound down, the basic choices for existing drafts are
>> 
>> - to go to last call with the drafts that are ready for it or
>> 
>> - to put outstanding WG drafts into another WG, such as MPLS, or
>> 
>> - to have the ADs sponsor "orphaned" drafts that don't fit in another
>> WG as individual submissions.
>> 
>> We have polled the current draft authors, and do not see any
>> insurmountable difficulties with this process.
>> 
>> There doesn't at present seem to be enough business to warrant another
>> L3VPN meeting in Paris. However, we feel that the future of the WG
>> (and of the work)
>> should be discussed in person, so we plan to request time on the
>> agenda to discuss this at
>> the RTGAREA meeting.
>> 
>> If anyone feels that closing L3VPN would be a mistake, now is the time
>> to speak up.
>> 
>> Regards
>> Marshall Eubanks / Ben Niven-Jenkins
> 
>