Changes between Version 10 and Version 11 of IETF87


Ignore:
Timestamp:
09/08/13 12:10:25 (9 years ago)
Author:
brian@…
Comment:

--

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • IETF87

    v10 v11  
    123123
    124124Last, but not least, the chairs are proud to report that the vast majority of protocol discussion during the meeting was based not only on Internet Drafts, but on actual implementation (much of which has already been released as Open Source).
     125
     126== INTAREA ==
     127The intarea working group met in Berlin for a two hour session. The
     128draft containing the Analysis of Solution Candidates to Reveal a Host
     129Identifier (HOST_ID) in Shared Address Deployments describing has been
     130published as RFC6967. The draft describing the use of the IPv6 Flow
     131Label for Server Load Balancing has completed WGLC Will be progressed
     132after this meeting. Brian Haberman presented some background
     133information about the implementation status experiment described in
     134RFC6982.
     135
     136There was a presentation describing a fragmentation strategy for
     137GRE. There were some questions about how ECN information would be
     138handled in the fragments. There were not enough participants who had
     139read the draft and the chair requested volunteers to review the
     140draft. There were two volunteers to do so. After receiving the reviews
     141a call for adoption would be issued on the mailing list.
     142
     143There was a presentation concerning a set of drafts that describe how
     144applications can use metadata to signal traffic characteristics to the
     145network. There was lively discussion of this topic and the general
     146sense of the room about these drafts was overall negative. It was also
     147the opinion of several people who spoke up that tsvwg was the proper
     148venue for this work.
     149
     150There was a presentation about a draft describing a stateless
     151userplane for virtual evolved packet core networks. It was presented
     152in intarea to increase awareness for this work being performed in the
     153mobility related working groups in the intarea. There was widespread
     154interest in this draft and further discussion will happen on the
     155mailing list.
     156
     157There was a presentation concerning issues with IP links on
     158spontaneous wireless networks. There was a lot of interest in this
     159draft and since the issues raised in the draft are common across
     160several types of wireless links intarea may be a good place to host
     161this work. Further discussion and potential adoption will happen on
     162the mailing list.
     163
     164The draft regarding scaling ARP for large data centers had been
     165revised based on comments received at the IETF86 intarea meeting as
     166well as on the mailing list. There were not enough people in the room
     167who had read the draft and a call for adoption of this draft would be
     168issued on the mailing list after the meeting.
     169
     170== SOFTWIRE ==
     171The Softwire Working Group met at the IETF meeting in Berlin for a two
     172and a half hour session. Since the Orlando meeting, Deployment
     173Considerations for Dual-Stack Lite has been published as RFC6908 and
     174the 6RD RADIUS draft has been published as RFC6930. The draft
     175documenting Public 4over6 has been submitted to the IESG as an
     176Informational document. The working group also adopted 3 new drafts as
     177working group documents: lightweight 4over6, MAP MIB and MAP
     178Radius. Two multicast related documents in the working group will be
     179submitted to IESG soon: DS-Lite multicast and multicast-prefix-option,
     180while the third, mesh multicast, will start a working group last call
     181soon. WGLC has completed successfully on both the DS-Lite MIB and Mesh
     182MIB drafts. These drafts will be sent for review by the MIB doctors
     183before submitting to IESG. A call for adoption of the 6RD MIB draft
     184has been issued on the mailing list, but a further review is needed
     185on both document quality and necessity before adoption.
     186
     187The chairs received more than 20 requests for presentations. The wg
     188documents including the unified CPE, lw4over6 and 4rd documents were
     189prioritized and presented first. The goal was to get open issues on wg
     190documents resolved first before discussing any new work. The meeting
     191also allocated some time for discussion about the dhcp extensions for
     192both MAP and lw4over6. WG discussed some related issues, especially on
     193the tickets recorded by the Issue Tracker. There are still some open
     194issues. Since the wg document of MAP DHCP has changed quite a bit, a
     195consensus check will be performed on the mailing list regarding the
     196scope of the draft. A draft describing use cases for MAP-T was
     197presented and there was widespread support in the room to adopt
     198it. The draft will be adopted as a wg item pending confirmation on the
     199mailing list. There were some presentations related to lw4over6 and
     200MAP-T and further discussion about this will take place on the mailing
     201list.
     202