[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Fw: I-D ACTION:draft-andersson-rtg-gmpls-change-04.txt

Hi,
A new revision of the MPLS and GMPLS change process I-D is available. This process appears to be stable and we are thinking of taking to the IESG quite soon, so review it now or risk having to live with it.
The changes in this revision are largely to clarify the use of the Preliminary Investigation phase. 

===
Section 1.2
Change 2119 boiler plate to
  Although this document is not a protocol definition, the key words
  "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD",
  "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document
  are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. This usage
  is chosen to make the steps and procedures completely clear.
===
Section 2.3 final paragraph
ADD
  It should be noted that the first stage in the change process is an
  optional Preliminary Investigation (see Section 4.2.1). This stage is
  explicitly included to allow external organizations to discuss
  requirements and proposed uses of the (G)MPLS technologies without
  the need to first develop Internet-Drafts, and builds on existing
  liaison processes where they exist.
===
Section 2.4
ADD
  o  Preliminary Investigation
     An optional preliminary phase that may be used to exchange views
     on a proposed requirement and usage of the (G)MPLS technologies
     without going to the effort of writing an Internet-Draft. This
     phase may be particularly useful to SDOs that have already
     invested heavily in documenting a problem statement, or may be
     used by anyone who wishes to hold discussions on the use of
     (G)MPLS.
===
Section 3
ADD para 2
  Whenever there is reason to believe that a particular problem may be
  solved by use of or extensions to the (G)MPLS protocols, a
  preliminary investigation phase may be used to discuss the
  requirements with the IETF. This may lead to an understanding that
  the problem is already solved, is outside the scope of the IETF, or
  requires more investigation possibly leading to changes to the
  (G)MPLS protocols.
===
Section 4.2.1 para 2
ADD
  In fact, although this step is described
  as lightweight because no Internet-Draft is required and because the
  nature of the step is discursive, it may be the case that this step
  involves considerable technical discussions and may, in fact, be an
  extensive, substantive exchange of opinions.
===
Section 4.2.1 para 3
s/may/MAY/
===
Section 4.2.1 final para
ADD
  A possible outcome of this preliminary invsetigation is that the
  requirements and problem are understood, but agreed to be out of
  scope for the IETF. Alternatively it may be that the problem can be
  solved with existing protocols.
===
Section 5.2 bullet 1
ADD
  (see Section 4.2.1)
===
Section 5.2 bullet 2
ADD
  (see Section 4.2.1)
===
Section 8 para 4
s/may/MAY/
===
----- Original Message ----- From: <Internet-Drafts@ietf.org> 
To: <i-d-announce@ietf.org>
Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 11:50 PM
Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-andersson-rtg-gmpls-change-04.txt



A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories.
Title : Change Process for Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Protocols and Procedures 
Author(s) : L. Andersson, A. Farrel
Filename : draft-andersson-rtg-gmpls-change-04.txt
Pages : 22
Date : 2006-10-4

The issues surrounding the extensibility of IETF protocols have been
  widely debated. These issues include when it is reasonable to
  extend IETF protocols with little or no review, and when extensions
  or variations need to be reviewed by the larger IETF community.
  Experience with IETF protocols has shown that extensibility of
  protocols without early IETF review can cause problems.

  The Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS)
  suites of protocols have become popular for a number of applications
  and deployment scenarios. One result of this popularity is a large
  number of suggestions for modifications and extensions.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-andersson-rtg-gmpls-change-04.txt

To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to
i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of
the message.
You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce
to change your subscription settings.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the
username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After
logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then
"get draft-andersson-rtg-gmpls-change-04.txt".

A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt

Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail.

Send a message to:
mailserv@ietf.org.
In the body type:
"FILE /internet-drafts/draft-andersson-rtg-gmpls-change-04.txt".

NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in
MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility.  To use this
feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE"
command.  To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or
a MIME-compliant mail reader.  Different MIME-compliant mail readers
exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with
"multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split
up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on
how to manipulate these messages.

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.