Re: [rsvp-dir] RSVP directorate formed

Bruce Davie <> Thu, 08 July 2010 17:05 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B17273A6B1B for <>; Thu, 8 Jul 2010 10:05:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.299
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id utthnPlw5T8w for <>; Thu, 8 Jul 2010 10:05:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35C163A6B41 for <>; Thu, 8 Jul 2010 10:05:23 -0700 (PDT)
Authentication-Results:; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEAOOhNUyrRN+J/2dsb2JhbACgMXGmapp6gmOCQgSIQokr
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.53,559,1272844800"; d="scan'208";a="223604376"
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP; 08 Jul 2010 17:05:27 +0000
Received: from [] ([]) by (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o68H5QPG020750; Thu, 8 Jul 2010 17:05:27 GMT
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Bruce Davie <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2010 13:05:25 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <> <> <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081)
Subject: Re: [rsvp-dir] RSVP directorate formed
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: RSVP directorate <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2010 17:05:24 -0000

 I have asked the directorate to start by looking at 3 drafts that have been proposed as WG items:



In response to some questions from Bob Briscoe, I then asked all the authors to provide short justifications for why their drafts should be adopted (I can pass these on to you if that would be helpful).

With that information in hand, I have asked the directorate to try to get some reviews done before the upcoming meeting.

Unfortunately, I am unable to attend the meeting in Maastricht. I agree, it would be great if one of the other directorate members were to introduce our little team in the meeting. Any volunteers?


On Jul 8, 2010, at 10:46 AM, Gorry Fairhurst wrote:

> Hello RSVP directorate!
> Now that a directorate exists, I'd like help in two ways to manage the RSVP work in TSVWG:
> 1) I'm assuming that you will help with selecting appropriate work for adoption of TSVWG (as per the top bullet below). How do you see this working, specifically there are a number of drafts that currently have not become work items - despite author pleas - while we waited for clarification of how to handle RSVP work. Undoubtedly I'll be asked if these can become work items. As usual I'll push-back on need to do the work, and people to review/contribute to the drafts. Are there current drafts know to the directorate that would seem ready and important enough that the WG should consider taking these on?
> 2) Would someone from the directorate like to say "hi we're here and this is our remit" - taht would be helpful in the tsvwg meeting!
> Gorry
>> At 08:01 AM 5/10/2010, Lars Eggert wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> following the discussion during the IETF-77 TSVAREA meeting on how to better review and progress extensions to (non-TE) RSVP and IntServ, the transport area directors have formed a new RSVP directorate and given it these tasks:
>>>  * Review of all new work related to RSVP and Integrated Services that
>>>    is proposed for IETF adoption. The purpose of this review is to
>>>    advise the ADs and the chairs of the Transport Area Working Group
>>>    (TSVWG) on whether a particular proposal should be taken on as a
>>>    work item. The directorate will continue to guide and review such
>>>    new work in TSVWG until it is ready for publication as an RFC.
>>>  * Review of selected documents during IETF last call or under IESG
>>>    review. The directorate monitors ongoing IETF work and should
>>>    independently decide when a document will benefit from their review,
>>>    assign a reviewer and enter into a follow-on discussion with the
>>>    authors. When deemed necessary, the area directors will on occasion
>>>    directly consult the directorate while forming their opinion on
>>>    selected documents being under review by the IESG.
>>>  * Cross-working group review. RSVP documents may have relevance to
>>>    several working groups, including TSVWG and MPLS-related groups
>>>    such as MPLS WG and CCAMP WG. The directorate will ensure that
>>>    drafts submitted to TSV WG are reviewed in the appropriate MPLS-related
>>>    WGs if necessary, and will bring drafts from the MPLS-related WGs
>>>    to the attention of the TSV WG as appropriate.
>>> The directorate can be reached at Additional information about the directorate is at
>>> Lars
> _______________________________________________
> rsvp-dir mailing list