[trill] Last Call: <draft-ietf-trill-rbridge-multilevel-05.txt> (Alternatives for Multilevel TRILL (Transparent Interconnection of Lots of Links)) to Informational RFC

The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org> Wed, 14 June 2017 21:42 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
CC: shares@ndzh.com, trill-chairs@ietf.org, trill@ietf.org, draft-ietf-trill-rbridge-multilevel@ietf.org, akatlas@gmail.com
Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org
Sender: iesg-secretary@ietf.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <149747653603.14024.7165373679028041136.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 14:42:16 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/trill/iIntd23xYrr3ALBg46CQ16v7fvU>
Subject: [trill] Last Call: <draft-ietf-trill-rbridge-multilevel-05.txt> (Alternatives for Multilevel TRILL (Transparent Interconnection of Lots of Links)) to Informational RFC

The IESG has received a request from the Transparent Interconnection of Lots
of Links WG (trill) to consider the following document: - 'Alternatives for
Multilevel TRILL (Transparent Interconnection of Lots
   of Links)'
  <draft-ietf-trill-rbridge-multilevel-05.txt> as Informational RFC

The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final
comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2017-06-28. Exceptionally, comments may be
sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the beginning of
the Subject line to allow automated sorting.

Abstract


   Although TRILL is based on IS-IS, which supports multilevel unicast
   routing, extending TRILL to multiple levels has challenges that are
   not addressed by the already-existing capabilities of IS-IS.  One
   issue is with the handling of multi-destination packet distribution
   trees. Other issues are with TRILL switch nicknames. How are such
   nicknames allocated across a multilevel TRILL network? Do nicknames
   need to be unique across an entire multilevel TRILL network or can
   they merely be unique within each multilevel area?

   This informational document enumerates and examines alternatives
   based on a number of factors including backward compatibility,
   simplicity, and scalability and makes recommendations in some cases.







The file can be obtained via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-trill-rbridge-multilevel/

IESG discussion can be tracked via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-trill-rbridge-multilevel/ballot/

The following IPR Declarations may be related to this I-D:

   https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1579/
   https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1813/

[trill] Last Call: <draft-ietf-trill-rbridge-mult… The IESG