From routing-discussion-bounces@ietf.org Sun Aug 1 18:22:47 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA28626 for ; Sun, 1 Aug 2004 18:22:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BrOf3-0001uj-Na; Sun, 01 Aug 2004 18:18:33 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BrOVn-00037q-KZ for routing-discussion@megatron.ietf.org; Sun, 01 Aug 2004 18:08:59 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA27280; Sun, 1 Aug 2004 18:08:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] ident=mailnull) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BrOYW-0001g7-40; Sun, 01 Aug 2004 18:11:49 -0400 Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] helo=[127.0.0.1]) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.41 (FreeBSD)) id 1BrOVj-0004k3-RH; Sun, 01 Aug 2004 22:08:56 +0000 Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 15:08:49 -0700 From: Alex Zinin X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <18110274455.20040801150849@psg.com> To: routing-discussion@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.8 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 79899194edc4f33a41f49410777972f8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: agenda@ietf.org Subject: San Diego RTGAREA meeting agenda X-BeenThere: routing-discussion@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Alex Zinin List-Id: Routing Area General mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: routing-discussion-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: routing-discussion-bounces@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Folks- Agenda for the monday meeting below. If I forgot to give someone a slot, please send me a message. Time: MONDAY, August 2, 2004: 1930-2200 Place: Seabreeze 1. Agenda bashing, aministrivia (ADs) [5m] 00:05 2. Announcements (ADs) [5m] 00:10 3. WG reports (ADs/chairs) [15m] 00:25 4. Area plans/milestones (ADs) [10m] 00:35 5. IP Traffic Engineering (Naming) [30m] 01:05 RM: draft-shen-ip-te-rsp-01.txt 6. Open mike [--] -- Alex http://www.psg.com/~zinin _______________________________________________ routing-discussion mailing list routing-discussion@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/routing-discussion From routing-discussion-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 4 23:47:05 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA04326 for ; Wed, 4 Aug 2004 23:47:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BsZ7w-0006G5-Us; Wed, 04 Aug 2004 23:41:13 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BsZ58-0005ue-AE for routing-discussion@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 04 Aug 2004 23:38:18 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA03794; Wed, 4 Aug 2004 23:38:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] ident=mailnull) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BsZ8X-0006WK-2R; Wed, 04 Aug 2004 23:41:50 -0400 Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] helo=[127.0.0.1]) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.41 (FreeBSD)) id 1BsZ4v-000M1R-2M; Thu, 05 Aug 2004 03:38:05 +0000 Message-ID: <4111ABAA.7030803@psg.com> Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 05:38:18 +0200 From: dimitri papadimitriou User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.7.1) Gecko/20040707 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: routing-discussion@ietf.org References: <18110274455.20040801150849@psg.com> In-Reply-To: <18110274455.20040801150849@psg.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 52e1467c2184c31006318542db5614d5 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Alex Zinin , agenda@ietf.org Subject: San Diego RTGAREA meeting - comment on draft-shen-ip-te-rsp-01.txt X-BeenThere: routing-discussion@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: dpapadimitriou@psg.com, dimitri.papadimitriou@alcatel.be List-Id: Routing Area General mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: routing-discussion-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: routing-discussion-bounces@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit here below the comments i raised on this document during the meeting: 1) the capability to allow exchanging RSVP Path/Resv between non- adjacent nodes has been defined (and is referred to as direct messaging) for the record see Section 8.1.1 of the LSP hierarchy document 2) to address the mechanisms detailed in this document, i would suggest to consider usage of a new Label Request C-Type together with a new Label C-Type, the bidirectional IP tunnel setup using the upstream Label would then be covered (other details would need to be further refined) this said, i'd like to see this item being progressed thanks, - dimitri. Alex Zinin wrote: > Folks- > > Agenda for the monday meeting below. If I forgot to give someone a slot, please > send me a message. > > Time: MONDAY, August 2, 2004: 1930-2200 > Place: Seabreeze > > 1. Agenda bashing, aministrivia (ADs) [5m] 00:05 > 2. Announcements (ADs) [5m] 00:10 > 3. WG reports (ADs/chairs) [15m] 00:25 > 4. Area plans/milestones (ADs) [10m] 00:35 > 5. IP Traffic Engineering (Naming) [30m] 01:05 > RM: draft-shen-ip-te-rsp-01.txt > 6. Open mike [--] > _______________________________________________ routing-discussion mailing list routing-discussion@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/routing-discussion From routing-discussion-bounces@ietf.org Thu Aug 5 20:50:02 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA00170 for ; Thu, 5 Aug 2004 20:50:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bsss7-0001GX-Lk; Thu, 05 Aug 2004 20:46:11 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BssoV-0000fL-EZ; Thu, 05 Aug 2004 20:42:27 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA29787; Thu, 5 Aug 2004 20:42:25 -0400 (EDT) From: Mukesh.Gupta@nokia.com Received: from mgw-x3.nokia.com ([131.228.20.26]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bsss5-0000sf-Gl; Thu, 05 Aug 2004 20:46:10 -0400 Received: from esdks002.ntc.nokia.com (esdks002.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.138.121]) by mgw-x3.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id i760gK613787; Fri, 6 Aug 2004 03:42:20 +0300 (EET DST) X-Scanned: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 03:42:06 +0300 Nokia Message Protector V1.3.31 2004060815 - RELEASE Received: (from root@localhost) by esdks002.ntc.nokia.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) id i760g6co015197; Fri, 6 Aug 2004 03:42:06 +0300 Received: from mgw-int1.ntc.nokia.com (172.21.143.96) by esdks002.ntc.nokia.com 00IrQv2C; Fri, 06 Aug 2004 03:42:05 EEST Received: from daebh002.NOE.Nokia.com (daebh002.americas.nokia.com [10.241.35.122]) by mgw-int1.ntc.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id i760fmn05657; Fri, 6 Aug 2004 03:41:48 +0300 (EET DST) Received: from daebe009.NOE.Nokia.com ([10.241.35.109]) by daebh002.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6881); Thu, 5 Aug 2004 19:41:16 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 19:41:15 -0500 Message-ID: <8D260779A766FB4A9C1739A476F84FA4026AB26E@daebe009.americas.nokia.com> Thread-Topic: San Diego RTGAREA meeting agenda Thread-Index: AcR4FldyQS1zG4R7Se+wBgjO9yQjlwDNymUg To: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Aug 2004 00:41:16.0166 (UTC) FILETIME=[14E87260:01C47B4E] X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-Scan-Signature: e1e48a527f609d1be2bc8d8a70eb76cb Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: iesg@ietf.org, routing-discussion@ietf.org Subject: RE: Last Call: 'Early IANA Allocation of Standards Track Codepoints' to BCP X-BeenThere: routing-discussion@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area General mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: routing-discussion-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: routing-discussion-bounces@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Alex/Kireeti, Does it make sense to cover the early assignment policy for=20 the requests that come from outside the IETF in the early allocation draft ? Look at section 6.1 of draft-ietf-ipngwg-icmp-v3-04.txt that talks about similar things. Regards Mukesh > -----Original Message----- > From: ietf-announce-bounces@ietf.org > [mailto:ietf-announce-bounces@ietf.org]On Behalf Of ext The IESG > Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2004 4:18 PM > To: IETF-Announce > Subject: Last Call: 'Early IANA Allocation of Standards Track > Codepoints' to BCP=20 >=20 >=20 > The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter=20 > to consider the=20 > following document: >=20 > - 'Early IANA Allocation of Standards Track Codepoints ' > as a BCP >=20 > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits > final comments on this action. Please send any comments to the > iesg@ietf.org or ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2004-09-02. >=20 > The file can be obtained via > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-kompella-zinin-early -allocation-02.txt _______________________________________________ IETF-Announce mailing list IETF-Announce@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce _______________________________________________ routing-discussion mailing list routing-discussion@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/routing-discussion From routing-discussion-bounces@ietf.org Fri Aug 6 00:13:55 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA11491 for ; Fri, 6 Aug 2004 00:13:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bsw03-0002KX-Mb; Fri, 06 Aug 2004 00:06:35 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bsvtr-00013W-Pi; Fri, 06 Aug 2004 00:00:11 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA10232; Fri, 6 Aug 2004 00:00:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] ident=mailnull) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BsvxT-0004AO-E7; Fri, 06 Aug 2004 00:03:57 -0400 Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] helo=[127.0.0.1]) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.41 (FreeBSD)) id 1Bsvto-0001mg-Lf; Fri, 06 Aug 2004 04:00:08 +0000 Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 21:00:07 -0700 From: Alex Zinin X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <1737177975.20040805210007@psg.com> To: Mukesh.Gupta@nokia.com In-Reply-To: <8D260779A766FB4A9C1739A476F84FA4026AB26E@daebe009.americas.nokia.com> References: <8D260779A766FB4A9C1739A476F84FA4026AB26E@daebe009.americas.nokia.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.8 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 3e15cc4fdc61d7bce84032741d11c8e5 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kireeti@juniper.net, iesg@ietf.org, routing-discussion@ietf.org Subject: Re: Last Call: 'Early IANA Allocation of Standards Track Codepoints' to BCP X-BeenThere: routing-discussion@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Alex Zinin List-Id: Routing Area General mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: routing-discussion-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: routing-discussion-bounces@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mukesh, I'm afraid that would have to be a completely different document and a completely different discussion, as the doc specifically addresses the situation with the "Standards Action" allocation policy and presumably from-outside-IETF requests wouldn't result in an IETF standards action. -- Alex http://www.psg.com/~zinin Thursday, August 5, 2004, 5:41:15 PM, Mukesh.Gupta@nokia.com wrote: > Alex/Kireeti, > Does it make sense to cover the early assignment policy for > the requests that come from outside the IETF in the early > allocation draft ? > Look at section 6.1 of draft-ietf-ipngwg-icmp-v3-04.txt > that talks about similar things. > Regards > Mukesh >> -----Original Message----- >> From: ietf-announce-bounces@ietf.org >> [mailto:ietf-announce-bounces@ietf.org]On Behalf Of ext The IESG >> Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2004 4:18 PM >> To: IETF-Announce >> Subject: Last Call: 'Early IANA Allocation of Standards Track >> Codepoints' to BCP >> >> >> The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter >> to consider the >> following document: >> >> - 'Early IANA Allocation of Standards Track Codepoints ' >> as a BCP >> >> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits >> final comments on this action. Please send any comments to the >> iesg@ietf.org or ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2004-09-02. >> >> The file can be obtained via >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-kompella-zinin-early > -allocation-02.txt > _______________________________________________ > IETF-Announce mailing list > IETF-Announce@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce _______________________________________________ routing-discussion mailing list routing-discussion@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/routing-discussion From routing-discussion-bounces@ietf.org Fri Aug 6 21:06:53 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA07895 for ; Fri, 6 Aug 2004 21:06:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BtFdO-0008JX-7J; Fri, 06 Aug 2004 21:04:30 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BtFcT-0008Bx-3O; Fri, 06 Aug 2004 21:03:33 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA07778; Fri, 6 Aug 2004 21:03:31 -0400 (EDT) From: Mukesh.Gupta@nokia.com Received: from mgw-x2.nokia.com ([131.228.20.22]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BtFgD-0000Ml-6T; Fri, 06 Aug 2004 21:07:29 -0400 Received: from esdks002.ntc.nokia.com (esdks002.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.138.121]) by mgw-x2.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id i7713BB10271; Sat, 7 Aug 2004 04:03:11 +0300 (EET DST) X-Scanned: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 04:03:00 +0300 Nokia Message Protector V1.3.31 2004060815 - RELEASE Received: (from root@localhost) by esdks002.ntc.nokia.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) id i77130d3029243; Sat, 7 Aug 2004 04:03:00 +0300 Received: from mgw-int1.ntc.nokia.com (172.21.143.96) by esdks002.ntc.nokia.com 00vqouad; Sat, 07 Aug 2004 04:03:00 EEST Received: from daebh001.NOE.Nokia.com (daebh001.americas.nokia.com [10.241.35.121]) by mgw-int1.ntc.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id i7712vn08562; Sat, 7 Aug 2004 04:02:57 +0300 (EET DST) Received: from daebe009.NOE.Nokia.com ([10.241.35.109]) by daebh001.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6881); Fri, 6 Aug 2004 20:02:56 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 20:02:55 -0500 Message-ID: <8D260779A766FB4A9C1739A476F84FA4026AB280@daebe009.americas.nokia.com> Thread-Topic: Last Call: 'Early IANA Allocation of Standards Track Codepoints' to BCP Thread-Index: AcR7agZskZwIWf5AQHiaAE0wFdurewAr6HCw To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Aug 2004 01:02:56.0829 (UTC) FILETIME=[46939ED0:01C47C1A] X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-Scan-Signature: bdc523f9a54890b8a30dd6fd53d5d024 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: kireeti@juniper.net, iesg@ietf.org, routing-discussion@ietf.org Subject: RE: Last Call: 'Early IANA Allocation of Standards Track Codepoints' to BCP X-BeenThere: routing-discussion@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area General mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: routing-discussion-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: routing-discussion-bounces@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Alex, I agree that it is out of scope of the current document=20 but I was wondering if it would make sense to change the scope of the current document, have some more discussions and cover the policy for those outside requests too. This way, we will not end up writing 2 separate documents for 2 similar problems (we could argue that they are not similar but..). Regards Mukesh > -----Original Message----- > From: ext Alex Zinin [mailto:zinin@psg.com] > Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2004 9:00 PM > To: Gupta Mukesh (Nokia-NET/MtView) > Cc: kireeti@juniper.net; routing-discussion@ietf.org; iesg@ietf.org > Subject: Re: Last Call: 'Early IANA Allocation of Standards Track > Codepoints' to BCP >=20 >=20 > Mukesh, >=20 > I'm afraid that would have to be a completely different document > and a completely different discussion, as the doc specifically > addresses the situation with the "Standards Action" allocation > policy and presumably from-outside-IETF requests wouldn't result > in an IETF standards action. >=20 > --=20 > Alex > http://www.psg.com/~zinin >=20 > Thursday, August 5, 2004, 5:41:15 PM, Mukesh.Gupta@nokia.com wrote: > > Alex/Kireeti, >=20 > > Does it make sense to cover the early assignment policy for=20 > > the requests that come from outside the IETF in the early > > allocation draft ? >=20 > > Look at section 6.1 of draft-ietf-ipngwg-icmp-v3-04.txt > > that talks about similar things. >=20 > > Regards > > Mukesh >=20 > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: ietf-announce-bounces@ietf.org > >> [mailto:ietf-announce-bounces@ietf.org]On Behalf Of ext The IESG > >> Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2004 4:18 PM > >> To: IETF-Announce > >> Subject: Last Call: 'Early IANA Allocation of Standards Track > >> Codepoints' to BCP=20 > >>=20 > >>=20 > >> The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter=20 > >> to consider the=20 > >> following document: > >>=20 > >> - 'Early IANA Allocation of Standards Track Codepoints ' > >> as a BCP > >>=20 > >> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks,=20 > and solicits > >> final comments on this action. Please send any comments to the > >> iesg@ietf.org or ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2004-09-02. > >>=20 > >> The file can be obtained via > >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-kompella-zinin-early > > -allocation-02.txt >=20 >=20 > > _______________________________________________ > > IETF-Announce mailing list > > IETF-Announce@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce >=20 >=20 _______________________________________________ routing-discussion mailing list routing-discussion@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/routing-discussion From routing-discussion-bounces@ietf.org Sat Aug 7 16:20:08 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA20583 for ; Sat, 7 Aug 2004 16:20:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BtXdN-00028K-E4; Sat, 07 Aug 2004 16:17:41 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BtXX2-0001K3-3A; Sat, 07 Aug 2004 16:11:08 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA20260; Sat, 7 Aug 2004 16:11:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] ident=mailnull) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BtXaz-00011P-Rq; Sat, 07 Aug 2004 16:15:15 -0400 Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] helo=[127.0.0.1]) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.41 (FreeBSD)) id 1BtXWz-000AmP-7N; Sat, 07 Aug 2004 20:11:05 +0000 Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 16:10:59 -0400 From: Alex Zinin X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <1456434342.20040807161059@psg.com> To: Mukesh.Gupta@nokia.com In-Reply-To: <8D260779A766FB4A9C1739A476F84FA4026AB280@daebe009.americas.nokia.com> References: <8D260779A766FB4A9C1739A476F84FA4026AB280@daebe009.americas.nokia.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.8 (/) X-Scan-Signature: e1b0e72ff1bbd457ceef31828f216a86 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kireeti@juniper.net, iesg@ietf.org, routing-discussion@ietf.org Subject: Re: Last Call: 'Early IANA Allocation of Standards Track Codepoints' to BCP X-BeenThere: routing-discussion@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Alex Zinin List-Id: Routing Area General mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: routing-discussion-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: routing-discussion-bounces@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mukesh, I'd prefer not to delay the document at this stage. It addresses a very practical problem, which we already see with BGP for example. There is a desire to use the described mechanism to solve the BGP problem, and delaying this draft would delay approval of the BGP document bundle, which has been in the works for a few years and is already in the IESG review stage. It seems that considerations for outside-the-IETF requests would be sufficiently different from those related to the IETF process, and would call for a completely new discussion. Thanks. -- Alex http://www.psg.com/~zinin Friday, August 6, 2004, 9:02:55 PM, Mukesh.Gupta@nokia.com wrote: > Alex, > I agree that it is out of scope of the current document > but I was wondering if it would make sense to change the > scope of the current document, have some more discussions > and cover the policy for those outside requests too. > This way, we will not end up writing 2 separate documents > for 2 similar problems (we could argue that they are not > similar but..). > Regards > Mukesh >> -----Original Message----- >> From: ext Alex Zinin [mailto:zinin@psg.com] >> Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2004 9:00 PM >> To: Gupta Mukesh (Nokia-NET/MtView) >> Cc: kireeti@juniper.net; routing-discussion@ietf.org; iesg@ietf.org >> Subject: Re: Last Call: 'Early IANA Allocation of Standards Track >> Codepoints' to BCP >> >> >> Mukesh, >> >> I'm afraid that would have to be a completely different document >> and a completely different discussion, as the doc specifically >> addresses the situation with the "Standards Action" allocation >> policy and presumably from-outside-IETF requests wouldn't result >> in an IETF standards action. >> >> -- >> Alex >> http://www.psg.com/~zinin >> >> Thursday, August 5, 2004, 5:41:15 PM, Mukesh.Gupta@nokia.com wrote: >> > Alex/Kireeti, >> >> > Does it make sense to cover the early assignment policy for >> > the requests that come from outside the IETF in the early >> > allocation draft ? >> >> > Look at section 6.1 of draft-ietf-ipngwg-icmp-v3-04.txt >> > that talks about similar things. >> >> > Regards >> > Mukesh >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: ietf-announce-bounces@ietf.org >> >> [mailto:ietf-announce-bounces@ietf.org]On Behalf Of ext The IESG >> >> Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2004 4:18 PM >> >> To: IETF-Announce >> >> Subject: Last Call: 'Early IANA Allocation of Standards Track >> >> Codepoints' to BCP >> >> >> >> >> >> The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter >> >> to consider the >> >> following document: >> >> >> >> - 'Early IANA Allocation of Standards Track Codepoints ' >> >> as a BCP >> >> >> >> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, >> and solicits >> >> final comments on this action. Please send any comments to the >> >> iesg@ietf.org or ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2004-09-02. >> >> >> >> The file can be obtained via >> >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-kompella-zinin-early >> > -allocation-02.txt >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> > IETF-Announce mailing list >> > IETF-Announce@ietf.org >> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce >> >> _______________________________________________ routing-discussion mailing list routing-discussion@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/routing-discussion From routing-discussion-bounces@ietf.org Sat Aug 7 19:46:40 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA00811 for ; Sat, 7 Aug 2004 19:46:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Btar9-0002wW-4A; Sat, 07 Aug 2004 19:44:07 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Btaq1-0002gT-In; Sat, 07 Aug 2004 19:42:57 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA00625; Sat, 7 Aug 2004 19:42:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from natint2.juniper.net ([207.17.136.150] helo=kummer.juniper.net) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Btau1-0003ph-5w; Sat, 07 Aug 2004 19:47:06 -0400 Received: from kummer.juniper.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by kummer.juniper.net (8.12.8p1/8.12.3) with ESMTP id i77NgO0g019004; Sat, 7 Aug 2004 16:42:24 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kireeti@juniper.net) Received: from localhost (kireeti@localhost) by kummer.juniper.net (8.12.8p1/8.12.3/Submit) with ESMTP id i77NgNlO019001; Sat, 7 Aug 2004 16:42:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: kummer.juniper.net: kireeti owned process doing -bs Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 16:42:23 -0700 (PDT) From: Kireeti Kompella To: Alex Zinin In-Reply-To: <1456434342.20040807161059@psg.com> Message-ID: <20040807163946.F18995@kummer.juniper.net> References: <8D260779A766FB4A9C1739A476F84FA4026AB280@daebe009.americas.nokia.com> <1456434342.20040807161059@psg.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7655788c23eb79e336f5f8ba8bce7906 Cc: Mukesh.Gupta@nokia.com, routing-discussion@ietf.org, iesg@ietf.org Subject: Re: Last Call: 'Early IANA Allocation of Standards Track Codepoints' to BCP X-BeenThere: routing-discussion@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area General mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: routing-discussion-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: routing-discussion-bounces@ietf.org On Sat, 7 Aug 2004, Alex Zinin wrote: > Mukesh, > > I'd prefer not to delay the document at this stage. It addresses a very > practical problem, which we already see with BGP for example. There is a desire > to use the described mechanism to solve the BGP problem, and delaying this > draft would delay approval of the BGP document bundle, which has been in the > works for a few years and is already in the IESG review stage. I concur wholeheartedly. > It seems that considerations for outside-the-IETF requests would be > sufficiently different from those related to the IETF process, and > would call for a completely new discussion. I agree with this. The considerations are quite different, and the resulting documents would probably be different; in any case, mixing the two in a single document would lead to more rather than less confusion. Kireeti. ------- _______________________________________________ routing-discussion mailing list routing-discussion@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/routing-discussion From routing-discussion-bounces@ietf.org Mon Aug 9 12:54:35 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA12944 for ; Mon, 9 Aug 2004 12:54:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BuDJH-0008T2-Jj; Mon, 09 Aug 2004 12:47:43 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BuDE9-0006mx-63; Mon, 09 Aug 2004 12:42:25 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA11511; Mon, 9 Aug 2004 12:42:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from e1.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.101]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BuDIU-0008Ch-H4; Mon, 09 Aug 2004 12:46:55 -0400 Received: from northrelay04.pok.ibm.com (northrelay04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.206]) by e1.ny.us.ibm.com (8.12.10/NS PXFA) with ESMTP id i79GfpOZ403388; Mon, 9 Aug 2004 12:41:51 -0400 Received: from rotala.raleigh.ibm.com (d01av02.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.216]) by northrelay04.pok.ibm.com (8.12.10/NCO/VER6.6) with ESMTP id i79GgseQ105466; Mon, 9 Aug 2004 12:42:54 -0400 Received: from rotala.raleigh.ibm.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rotala.raleigh.ibm.com (8.12.8/8.12.5) with ESMTP id i79GgMfj025035; Mon, 9 Aug 2004 12:42:22 -0400 Received: from rotala.raleigh.ibm.com (narten@localhost) by rotala.raleigh.ibm.com (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) with ESMTP id i79GgMVn025031; Mon, 9 Aug 2004 12:42:22 -0400 Message-Id: <200408091642.i79GgMVn025031@rotala.raleigh.ibm.com> To: Mukesh.Gupta@nokia.com In-Reply-To: Message from Mukesh.Gupta@nokia.com of "Thu, 05 Aug 2004 19:41:15 CDT." <8D260779A766FB4A9C1739A476F84FA4026AB26E@daebe009.americas.nokia.com> Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 12:42:22 -0400 From: Thomas Narten X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 52e1467c2184c31006318542db5614d5 Cc: zinin@psg.com, kireeti@juniper.net, iesg@ietf.org, routing-discussion@ietf.org Subject: Re: Last Call: 'Early IANA Allocation of Standards Track Codepoints' to BCP X-BeenThere: routing-discussion@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area General mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: routing-discussion-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: routing-discussion-bounces@ietf.org FWIW, I too agree that this document shouldn't deal with requests for non-WG documents. The issues are very different. > Look at section 6.1 of draft-ietf-ipngwg-icmp-v3-04.txt > that talks about similar things. Looking at just this section, I think some additional clarifications are needed: > 1. The IANA should allocate and permanently register new ICMPv6 type > codes from IETF RFC publication. This is for all RFC types > including standards track, informational, experimental status, > etc. With the IESG approval of draft-iesg-rfced-documents-03.txt, I think the above needs more clarification. Is it the intention that a document that is submitted to the RFC Editor as an individual submission should be granted ICMP code points? I hope not, as that potentially opens up the door for permanent IANA code point allocation for essentially unreviewed (or broken) purposes. > 3. Requests for type value assignments from outside of the IETF > should be sent to the IETF for review. The general guideline for > this review is that the assignment should be made if there is > public and open documentation of the protocol and if the > assignment is not being used to circumvent an existing IETF > protocol or work in progress. Please read RFC 2434, where it talks about the motivation for having a "designated expert". The above is too vague about who makes the has final authority for making a decision. And what does it mean "to circumvent an existing IETF protocol or work in progress"? E.g., if a WG rejects something as "not a good idea", or no WG thinks that a proposal "is a good idea", what happens? Thomas _______________________________________________ routing-discussion mailing list routing-discussion@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/routing-discussion From routing-discussion-bounces@ietf.org Tue Aug 10 13:24:54 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA14433 for ; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 13:24:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BuaFP-00048B-JI; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 13:17:15 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BuZxs-00089Q-4v; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 12:59:08 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA12274; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 12:59:04 -0400 (EDT) From: Mukesh.Gupta@nokia.com Received: from mgw-x1.nokia.com ([131.228.20.21]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bua2Q-0000GK-RS; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 13:03:52 -0400 Received: from esdks003.ntc.nokia.com (esdks003.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.138.158]) by mgw-x1.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id i7AGw6318491; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 19:58:15 +0300 (EET DST) X-Scanned: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 19:56:32 +0300 Nokia Message Protector V1.3.31 2004060815 - RELEASE Received: (from root@localhost) by esdks003.ntc.nokia.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) id i7AGuWda028628; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 19:56:32 +0300 Received: from mgw-int1.ntc.nokia.com (172.21.143.96) by esdks003.ntc.nokia.com 00UV97Ix; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 19:56:29 EEST Received: from daebh001.NOE.Nokia.com (daebh001.americas.nokia.com [10.241.35.121]) by mgw-int1.ntc.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id i7AGuLn04543; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 19:56:22 +0300 (EET DST) Received: from daebe009.NOE.Nokia.com ([10.241.35.109]) by daebh001.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6881); Tue, 10 Aug 2004 11:56:15 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 11:56:13 -0500 Message-ID: <8D260779A766FB4A9C1739A476F84FA4026AB29B@daebe009.americas.nokia.com> Thread-Topic: Last Call: 'Early IANA Allocation of Standards Track Codepoints' to BCP Thread-Index: AcR+L/ZQkc5RtCMhSHuXOqaqzZcfPQAyoS/g To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Aug 2004 16:56:15.0284 (UTC) FILETIME=[F2C07740:01C47EFA] X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 4d87d2aa806f79fed918a62e834505ca Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: zinin@psg.com, kireeti@juniper.net, iesg@ietf.org, routing-discussion@ietf.org Subject: RE: Last Call: 'Early IANA Allocation of Standards Track Codepoints' to BCP X-BeenThere: routing-discussion@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area General mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: routing-discussion-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: routing-discussion-bounces@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thomas, > FWIW, I too agree that this document shouldn't deal with requests for > non-WG documents. The issues are very different. After hearing all the comments and the urgent requirements for this draft, I agree that it would be wise to address the non-WG requests in a separate document. Lets deal with your comments on the ICMPv6 draft, in IPv6 WG mailing list :) Regards Mukesh >=20 > > Look at section 6.1 of draft-ietf-ipngwg-icmp-v3-04.txt > > that talks about similar things. >=20 > Looking at just this section, I think some additional clarifications > are needed: >=20 > > 1. The IANA should allocate and permanently register new=20 > ICMPv6 type > > codes from IETF RFC publication. This is for all RFC types > > including standards track, informational, experimental status, > > etc. >=20 > With the IESG approval of draft-iesg-rfced-documents-03.txt, I think > the above needs more clarification. Is it the intention that a > document that is submitted to the RFC Editor as an individual > submission should be granted ICMP code points? I hope not, as that > potentially opens up the door for permanent IANA code point allocation > for essentially unreviewed (or broken) purposes. >=20 > > 3. Requests for type value assignments from outside of the IETF > > should be sent to the IETF for review. The general=20 > guideline for > > this review is that the assignment should be made if there is > > public and open documentation of the protocol and if the > > assignment is not being used to circumvent an existing IETF > > protocol or work in progress. >=20 > Please read RFC 2434, where it talks about the motivation for having a > "designated expert". The above is too vague about who makes the has > final authority for making a decision. And what does it mean "to > circumvent an existing IETF protocol or work in progress"? E.g., if a > WG rejects something as "not a good idea", or no WG thinks that a > proposal "is a good idea", what happens? >=20 > Thomas >=20 _______________________________________________ routing-discussion mailing list routing-discussion@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/routing-discussion From routing-discussion-bounces@ietf.org Wed Aug 18 17:28:35 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA20947 for ; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 17:28:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BxXPs-0007Ni-WD; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 16:52:17 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BxWol-00047j-Hq for routing-discussion@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 16:13:55 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA08635 for ; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 16:13:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from netcore.fi ([193.94.160.1]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BxWuN-0006v5-PI for routing-discussion@ietf.org; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 16:19:45 -0400 Received: from localhost (pekkas@localhost) by netcore.fi (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i7IKCgR28232 for ; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 23:12:42 +0300 Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 23:12:42 +0300 (EEST) From: Pekka Savola To: routing-discussion@ietf.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 97adf591118a232206bdb5a27b217034 Subject: GTSM with OSPF X-BeenThere: routing-discussion@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area General mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: routing-discussion-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: routing-discussion-bounces@ietf.org >From today-published http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/707/cisco-sa-20040818-ospf.shtml: "A Cisco device running Internetwork Operating System (IOS) and enabled for the Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) protocol is vulnerable to a Denial of Service (DoS) attack from a malformed OSPF packet. The OSPF protocol is not enabled by default. [...] Since OSPF needs to process unicast packets as well as multicast packets, this vulnerability can be exploited remotely. It is also possible for an attacker to target multiple systems on the local segment at a time." Note: the most stringent check for unicast packets, unfortunately, is to check that TTL=1 which is trivally spoofable.. This makes me wonder.. Do we need to specify anything to use GTSM with OSPF, or is it just a matter of implementation? This would seem like a good idea to me. Of course, folks will ask, why not use OSPF authentication instead? Maybe, maybe not. It consumes processing resources. Key management is always an added complexity. It can be used as a DoS attack the same way as BGP MD5 authentication can. It's not as simple as TTL-based authentication. -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings _______________________________________________ routing-discussion mailing list routing-discussion@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/routing-discussion