[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
ASON Routing
- To: <ccamp@ops.ietf.org>
- Subject: ASON Routing
- From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
- Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 17:50:10 -0000
- Cc: "Scott Bradner" <sob@harvard.edu>, "Lam, Hing-Kam \(Kam\)" <hklam@alcatel-lucent.com>, "Stephen Trowbridge" <sjtrowbridge@alcatel-lucent.com>, "Yoichi Maeda" <yoichi.maeda@ntt-at.co.jp>, <dward@cisco.com>, "Ross Callon" <rcallon@juniper.net>, "Brungard, Deborah A, ALABS" <dbrungard@att.com>
- Reply-to: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
Hi,
You may have noticed the liaison we received from the ITU-T at the end of
February on ASON routing.
This was a detailed review of RFC 4258 and RFC 4652 against the latest
requirements documented in ITU-T Recommendations and arose in response to
our request for exactly such a review after we heard that Study Group 15 was
not happy with our analysis.
You can see the liaison at https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/424/ and the
output of the review at
https://datatracker.ietf.org/documents/LIAISON/file531.pdf
We held an ad hoc meeting in Philadelphia with many of the concerned parties
(thanks to the ITU folk who travelled specially, and to the IETF GMPLS and
routing experts who gave up their evening) to discuss the issues raised, to
try to understand and scope the differences, and to agree the way forward.
We decided that the best approach will be to revise RFC 4258 as a bis, and
to then consider whether any further work is needed to RFC 4652. At the same
time, we will freeze work on draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ason-routing-ospf-04.txt
until we know whether it also needs to be modified - we expect that by the
time of our next meeting (July 2008) we will know whether modifications are
required.
The new work will lead to draft-ietf-ccamp-rfc4258-bis-00.txt. But may get
there through multiple revisions of an individual submission. The draft may
reuse substantial text from RFC 4258, but it was agreed that every
requirement in the document will show full traceability back to the ITU-T
recommendations.
At the moment, I am looking to put together a "compact" team of editors for
this work. People in the team must be prepared to make significant textual
contributions. Please contact me if you wish to be in this team (please also
assume that I have not heard from you unless you receive a response from
me).
Once the team is in place, we will also set up an IETF mailing list for open
community discussions of the work.
When the work is complete it will we discussed and last called on the CCAMP
mailing list, and will be liaised to the ITU-T as appropriate.
We will also liaise this information to the ITU-T to solicit contributors
from there.
Thanks,
Adrian