[Rtg-dt-encap-considerations] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-rtg-dt-encap-02.txt

Erik Nordmark <nordmark@acm.org> Fri, 22 May 2015 16:41 UTC

Return-Path: <nordmark@acm.org>
X-Original-To: rtg-dt-encap-considerations@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtg-dt-encap-considerations@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74B591A1B7F; Fri, 22 May 2015 09:41:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.935
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.935 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=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 GWhnhZJ7CGmO; Fri, 22 May 2015 09:40:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from c.mail.sonic.net (c.mail.sonic.net [64.142.111.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D180E1A0366; Fri, 22 May 2015 09:40:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.0.187] (96-24-64-164.sfo.clearwire-wmx.net [96.24.64.164] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by c.mail.sonic.net (8.15.1/8.15.1) with ESMTPSA id t4MGenpD006357 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 22 May 2015 09:40:50 -0700
Message-ID: <555F5C11.50000@acm.org>
Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 09:40:49 -0700
From: Erik Nordmark <nordmark@acm.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtgwg@ietf.org, "rtg-dt-encap-considerations@ietf.org" <Rtg-dt-encap-considerations@ietf.org>
References: <555F577B.9050503@acm.org>
In-Reply-To: <555F577B.9050503@acm.org>
X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <555F577B.9050503@acm.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Sonic-CAuth: UmFuZG9tSVYk/uyr2PdBG9vAPHzTR4njmE7VBpNmDKRltVhaXVDvuqd3jN7kcpokFqXUGP5yXBgaC08wmefT3QsdybC457Au
X-Sonic-ID: C;9rCRTaEA5RG/rfjYVPtzAg== M;zH4GTqEA5RG/rfjYVPtzAg==
X-Sonic-Spam-Details: 0.0/5.0 by cerberusd
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-dt-encap-considerations/IJw9HEnvHYPum4LATcVDkWz4yrA>
Subject: [Rtg-dt-encap-considerations] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-rtg-dt-encap-02.txt
X-BeenThere: rtg-dt-encap-considerations@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Area Design Team on Encapsulation Considerations discussion list <rtg-dt-encap-considerations.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtg-dt-encap-considerations>, <mailto:rtg-dt-encap-considerations-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtg-dt-encap-considerations/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtg-dt-encap-considerations@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtg-dt-encap-considerations-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-dt-encap-considerations>, <mailto:rtg-dt-encap-considerations-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 16:41:02 -0000

The design team has updated this document based on comments we received
in the meetings and hallways in the Dallas.

I think the chairs are planning to ask for WG adoption, so it would be
good for folks to take a look at the draft.

The change log section summarizes the changes:
    The changes from draft-rtg-dt-encap-01 based on feedback at the
    Dallas IETF meeting:
    o  Setting the context that not all common issues might apply to all
       encapsulations, but that they should all be understood before
       being dismissed.
    o  Clarified that IPv6 flow label is useful for entropy in
       combination with a UDP source port.
    o  Editorially added a "summary" set of bullets to most sections.
    o  Editorial clarifications in the next protocol section to more
       clearly state the three areas.
    o  Folded the two next protocol sections into one.
    o  Mention the MPLS first nibble issue in the next protocol section.
    o  Mention that viewing the next protocol as an index to a table with
       processing instructions can provide additional flexibility in the
       protocol evolution.
    o  For the OAM "don't forward to end stations" added that defining a
       bit seems better than using a special next-protocol value.
    o  Added mention of DTLS in addition to IPsec for security.
    o  Added some mention of IPv6 hob-by-hop options of other headers
       than potentially can be copied from inner to outer header.
    o  Added text on architectural considerations when it might make
       sense to define an additional header/protocol as opposed to using
       the extensibility mechanism in the existing encapsulation
       protocol.
    o  Clarified the "unconstrained TLVs" in the hardware friendly
       section.
    o  Clarified the text around checksum verification and full vs.
       header checksums.
    o  Added wording that the considerations might apply for encaps
       outside of the routing area.
    o  Added references to draft-ietf-pwe3-congcons,
       draft-ietf-tsvwg-rfc5405bis, RFC2473, and RFC7325
    o  Removed reference to RFC3948.
    o  Updated the acknowledgements section.
    o  Added this change log section.

    Erik (for the design team)



-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: 	New Version Notification for draft-rtg-dt-encap-02.txt
Date: 	Thu, 21 May 2015 19:03:07 -0700
From: 	internet-drafts@ietf.org
To: 	Jon Hudson <jon.hudson@gmail.com>om>, Tom Herbert
<therbert@google.com>om>, Lawrence Kreeger <kreeger@cisco.com>om>, Patricia
Thaler <pthaler@broadcom.com>om>, Patricia Thaler <pthaler@broadcom.com>om>,
Jon Hudson <jon.hudson@gmail.com>om>, Albert Tian
<albert.tian@ericsson.com>om>, Jesse Gross <jgross@vmware.com>om>, Albert Tian
<albert.tian@ericsson.com>om>, Pankaj Garg <pankajg@microsoft.com>om>, Pankaj
Garg <pankajg@microsoft.com>om>, Tom Herbert <therbert@google.com>om>, Jesse
Gross <jgross@vmware.com>om>, Erik Nordmark <nordmark@arista.com>om>, Lawrence
Kreeger <kreeger@cisco.com>om>, Erik Nordmark <nordmark@arista.com>



A new version of I-D, draft-rtg-dt-encap-02.txt
has been successfully submitted by Erik Nordmark and posted to the
IETF repository.

Name:		draft-rtg-dt-encap
Revision:	02
Title:		Encapsulation Considerations
Document date:	2015-05-21
Group:		Individual Submission
Pages:		41
URL:            https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rtg-dt-encap-02.txt
Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-rtg-dt-encap/
Htmlized:       https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-rtg-dt-encap-02
Diff:           https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-rtg-dt-encap-02

Abstract:
    The IETF Routing Area director has chartered a design team to look at
    common issues for the different data plane encapsulations being
    discussed in the NVO3 and SFC working groups and also in the BIER
    BoF, and also to look at the relationship between such encapsulations
    in the case that they might be used at the same time.  The purpose of
    this design team is to discover, discuss and document considerations
    across the different encapsulations in the different WGs/BoFs so that
    we can reduce the number of wheels that need to be reinvented in the
    future.

                                                                                   


Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

The IETF Secretariat




_______________________________________________
Rtg-dt-encap-considerations mailing list
Rtg-dt-encap-considerations@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-dt-encap-considerations