From owner-routing-discussion  Sat Oct 21 07:51:17 2000
Received: from ce-nfs-1.cisco.com (ce-nfs-1.cisco.com [171.68.202.251])
	by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id HAA18065
	for <routing-discussion@ietf.org>; Sat, 21 Oct 2000 07:51:16 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sj-dial-2-104.cisco.com (sj-dial-2-104.cisco.com [10.19.226.105])
	by ce-nfs-1.cisco.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id EAA26207
	for <routing-discussion@ietf.org>; Sat, 21 Oct 2000 04:50:45 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 04:44:39 -0700
From: Alex Zinin <azinin@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: The Bat! (v1.41) REG'D / CD5BF9353B3B7091
Reply-To: Alex Zinin <azinin@cisco.com>
Organization: Cisco Systems
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Message-ID: <3197.001021@cisco.com>
To: Routing Area IETF <routing-discussion@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Routing Area Status Update
In-reply-To: <BCFB7F5FCA46D3119EE10050048279E0266CA8@nt_d2300.chromisys.com>
References: <BCFB7F5FCA46D3119EE10050048279E0266CA8@nt_d2300.chromisys.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


David, Rob:

Do we have any status update on this?

Thanks,
-- 
Alex Zinin

> First, Rob and I would like to express our appreciation to all those of
> you
> who have posted suggestions on the list and otherwise participated in the
> discussion. The broader and deeper insights we get the better the outcome
> will be for structuring the work going forward.
> 
> It's been a week since IETF, and everybody at least agrees that we want
> to
> move quickly, so we thought the community deserved a status update on
> where
> we stand on these items. Nothing is finalized to the point that further
> discussion and direction changes are precluded, but here is the current
> state of affairs:
> 
> - We are proceeding toward proposing a new Working Group to handle
> generalized comtrol plane issues, as identified in the routing area
> meeting
> (protection/restoration, link characterization, etc.). We are beginning
> to
> talk to potential candidates for chairs of this working group and once we
> have good candidates we will proceed with the details of the charter.
> This
> will in all likelihood *not* be the general routing area WG discussed at
> the
> routing-area meeting, but a specific WG for this task, and we are
> optimistic
> that Rob and I will find excellent chairs so we won't have to assume this
> problematical role.
> 
> - The "Foo-over-MPLS" work is currently under discussion in the IESG and
> IAB. The exact form of this work, and which area undertakes it is not
> decided. It may be a few more weeks before this settles down. It is not
> likely that we will charter the work in the form of "Foo-over-anything"
> as
> some of the list have proposed however, because there is concern that the
> encapsulating protocol plays a significant enough role in the details of
> the
> method that we want to make sure no issues surrounding congestion
> control,
> security, scope of deployment, etc. are missed.
> 
> - We are in the last stage of getting the IPO WG going. There are one or
> two
> charter items that need a final pass, but this should settle down quite
> rapidly.
> 
> Dave and Rob.