Re: [tsvwg] New draft to update L2TP, GRE, PPTP, GTP & VXLAN, etc. for ECN

[Bob Briscoe <[e-mail]>]

Andy,

On 08/07/16 14:51, Andrew G. Malis wrote:
> Bob,
>
> How about RFC 4023, MPLS in IP or GRE?

RFC5129 covers ECN for MPLS in MPLS, MPLS in IP. Because it's quite 
different from IP-in-IP where ECN is concerned.

But thx anyway.


Bob

>
> Cheers,
> Andy
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 8:11 AM, Bob Briscoe <[e-mail] 
> <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>
>     tsvwg, intarea, and respective co-chairs,
>
>     I have posted a new very brief draft (under 2 pages not incl.
>     boilerplate), intended for standards track as a bis to RFC6040.
>     As suggested in Buenos Aires, this has been extracted from
>     draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-encap-guidelines, to cut all the clutter and
>     highlight solely the standards track stuff.
>
>     Propagating Explicit Congestion Notification Across IP Tunnel
>     Headers Separated by a Shim
>     https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-briscoe-tsvwg-rfc6040bis-00
>
>     If approved, it is intended to update L2TP, GRE, PPTP, GTP & VXLAN.
>     Obviously the IETF does not control GTP - see text for how 3GPP
>     might use this spec.
>     Simialrly, given VXLAN is informational, it's perhaps not
>     appropriate to update it - exactly how this is worded is for
>     discussion.
>
>     For IETF-96, I've asked for a slot in intarea to explain, and I
>     also hope to cover this in an ecn-encap-guidelines slot in tsvwg.
>
>     I'd appreciate help identifying more tunnelling protocols that
>     follow the pattern of a shim sandwiched between two IP headers.
>     Since posting, I've looked at Joe's Tunnelling draft and realised
>     I missed out Geneve and GUE. More?
>
>     Cheers
>
>
>     Bob
>
>     On 08/07/16 12:41, [e-mail]
>     <mailto:[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>         A new version of I-D, draft-briscoe-tsvwg-rfc6040bis-00.txt
>         has been successfully submitted by Bob Briscoe and posted to the
>         IETF repository.
>
>         Name:           draft-briscoe-tsvwg-rfc6040bis
>         Revision:       00
>         Title:          Propagating Explicit Congestion Notification
>         Across IP Tunnel Headers Separated by a Shim
>         Document date:  2016-07-08
>         Group:          Individual Submission
>         Pages:          5
>         URL:
>         https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-briscoe-tsvwg-rfc6040bis-00.txt
>         Status:
>         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-briscoe-tsvwg-rfc6040bis/
>         Htmlized:
>         https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-briscoe-tsvwg-rfc6040bis-00
>
>
>         Abstract:
>             RFC 6040 on "Tunnelling of Explicit Congestion
>         Notification" made the
>             rules for propagation of ECN consistent for all forms of
>         IP in IP
>             tunnel.  This specification extends the scope of RFC 6040
>         to include
>             tunnels where two IP headers are separated by a shim
>         header that
>             cannot stand alone.
>
>
>
>         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 <http://tools.ietf.org>.
>
>         The IETF Secretariat
>
>
>     -- 
>     ________________________________________________________________
>     Bob Briscoe http://bobbriscoe.net/
>
>

-- 
________________________________________________________________
Bob Briscoe                               http://bobbriscoe.net/