Re: [trill] draft-ietf-trill-channel-tunnel-05 - 2 week WG LC (5/29 to 6/12)

[Donald Eastlake <[e-mail]>]

This draft provides security for RBridge Channel messages, a feature
missing from RFC 7178 whose absence caused some difficulty in getting
RFC 7178 approved.

I support this as a co-author.

I am not aware of any IPR in this draft.

Thanks,
Donald
=============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   [phone] (cell)
 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
 [e-mail]


On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 8:37 AM, Susan Hares <[e-mail]> wrote:
> This is to begin a 2 week WG LC for draft-ietf-trill-channel-tunnel-05 (5/29
> to 6/12).  The authors (Donald, Mohammed, Yizhou) should send a note to the
> list indicating whether they know if any IPR.
>
>
>
> You can access the draft at:
>
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-trill-channel-tunnel/
>
>
>
> A summary of the document is:
>
>    The IETF TRILL (Transparent Interconnection of Lots of Links)
>
>    protocol includes an optional mechanism, called RBridge Channel, that
>
>    is specified in RFC 7178, for the transmission of typed messages
>
>    between TRILL switches in the same campus and between TRILL switches
>
>    and end stations on the same link. This document specifies two
>
>    optional extensions to the RBridge Channel protocol: (1) A standard
>
>    method to tunnel a variety of payload types by encapsulating them in
>
>    an RBridge Channel message; and (2) A method to support security
>
>    facilities for RBridge Channel messages. This document updates RFC
>
>    7178.
>
>
>
> Please answer the following questions:
>
> 1)      Does this draft enhance RFC7178 and is it ready for WG LC?
>
> 2)      Do you have any concerns regarding the mechanisms?
>
>
>
> Sue