From bdavie@cisco.com Tue Jul 6 05:52:27 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rsvp-dir@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: rsvp-dir@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C63413A68D7 for ; Tue, 6 Jul 2010 05:52:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -7.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mDOOT4XB7nXF for ; Tue, 6 Jul 2010 05:52:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sj-iport-2.cisco.com (sj-iport-2.cisco.com [171.71.176.71]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9FE53A6888 for ; Tue, 6 Jul 2010 05:52:26 -0700 (PDT) Authentication-Results: sj-iport-2.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEAJzDMkyrRN+J/2dsb2JhbACgBHGlNpoqgmOCQgSIOg X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.53,546,1272844800"; d="scan'208";a="265713252" Received: from sj-core-3.cisco.com ([171.68.223.137]) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 06 Jul 2010 12:52:29 +0000 Received: from [10.32.241.74] ([10.32.241.74]) by sj-core-3.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o66CqSsX012696 for ; Tue, 6 Jul 2010 12:52:28 GMT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081) From: Bruce Davie In-Reply-To: <201006081518.o58FIDAk026957@bagheera.jungle.bt.co.uk> Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 08:52:28 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <7DE4BBBC-0F8F-4EE9-9D60-CA1C715609A9@cisco.com> References: <201006041739.o54HdaXY031030@bagheera.jungle.bt.co.uk> <9785CB6C-C88B-4B62-8662-57933C644339@cisco.com> <201006071729.o57HTkCC015181@bagheera.jungle.bt.co.uk> <201006081518.o58FIDAk026957@bagheera.jungle.bt.co.uk> To: rsvp-dir@ietf.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081) Subject: [rsvp-dir] Our first work items for RSVP Directorate - would like some progress before July 18 X-BeenThere: rsvp-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: RSVP directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2010 12:52:27 -0000 Directorate, Some weeks back, I asked for some review of 3 drafts related to RSVP, = and I got a request from Bob to get some justification from the authors = for why the drafts deserve consideration. Below, you will now see that = justification for each draft. My hope is that at the very least some = people from the directorate will have an opinion about said drafts in = time for next IETF (July 18) even if you are not attending.=20 Feel free to share your opinions on this list. Thanks, Bruce >=20 > RSVP Flexible Resource Sharing > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= > The bulk of the work has been merged into = draft-berger-ccamp-assoc-info-01.txt. > The rest is progressed as standalone I-D = :draft-narayanan-tsvwg-rsvp-resource-sharing-02.txt >=20 > - What problem with existing RSVP/Intserv are you trying to solve? = What new capability will we have if this draft becomes a standard? > * RSVP currently offers some support for resource sharing = (historically designed with multicast applications in mind). However, = this is restricted to sharing across reservations with the same = destination transport address (ie with same Session). The proposed = extensions retain the existing concept of resource sharing, but adds the = flexibility to apply resource sharing across any arbitrary set of = reservations. >=20 > - What class of application will benefit if your draft becomes a = standard? > * Many Voice/Multimedia/Collaboration applications that need = resource reservation will benefit from the extensions because those will = avoid significant bandwidth wastage in various practical scenarios. For = example, without the extensions, in a Voice Call-Waiting scenario, RSVP = will reserve twice the necessary resources on common links. Similarly, = in a Voice Shared Line scenario (i.e. a single number that rings = multiple endpoints), without the extensions, RSVP will reserve N times = the necessary resources on common links. Another example scenario is = where a Video on Demand streamer uses RSVP to establish reservations to = an endpoint behind a symmetric NAT: In case of session handover from = streamer to streamer, current RSVP will reserver twice the necessary = resources. >=20 > - Is there another way to solve this problem (or might someone think = there is)? If so, explain how your solution is better. > * We are not aware of any other way to solve the problem of = sharing resources across arbitrary RSVP reservations. However, it was = brought to our attention that CCAMP had already defined an ASSOCIATION = object that allows to associate states (including some resource sharing = state) across different GMPLS RSVP-TE established Label Switch Paths, = which has a lot in common with the RSVP Flexible Resource Sharing = problem/solution. This is why the bulk of the RSVP Flexible Resource = Sharing work has now been merged with the corresponding CCAMP document = (draft-berger-ccamp-assoc-info). >=20 > - What community of users will benefit from this work? > Enterprises using Voice/Multimedia/Collaboration applications and = wanting to guarantee QoS to those through RSVP resource reservation. > Service Providers offering managed Voice/Multimedia/Collaboration = applications to Enterprise customers. > Service Providers offering Video on Demand services to residential = customers and wanting to guarantee QoS of VoD sessions through RSVP = resource reservation. >=20 The next 2 drafts are considered as a pair. >=20 > "Multi-TSPEC/Multi-PREEMPTION" >=20 >=20 > * draft-polk-tsvwg-intserv-multiple-tspec > * draft-lefaucheur-tsvwg-rsvp-multiple-preemption >=20 > - What problem with existing RSVP/Intserv are you trying to solve? = What new capability will we have if this draft becomes a standard? > Modern real-time applications and endpoints are very often = capable of transmitting at different bandwidth rates, and capable of = dynamically adjusting their transmission rate at session establishment, = or mid-session, to achieve the best possible user experience in the = current conditions. When resource reservation is not used, endpoints can = perform dynamic rate adjustment in a reactive manner based on congestion = detection. When resource reservation is used, endpoints can take = advantage of it to achieve efficient dynamic encoding/bandwidth = adjustment in a proactive manner (i.e. before any congestion occurs). To = that end, the resource reservation protocol needs to perform dynamic = reservation sizing/resizing in order to help endpoints determine the = best "codec/resolution" that can be achieved in the current conditions. = The MULTI_TSPEC/MULTI_PREEMPTION I-Ds provide a mechanism to achieve = this dynamic reservation sizing/resizing in a single signaling = round-trip (by essentially allowing to convey multiple "bandwidth" -aka = TSPEC/FLOWSPEC- in a single RSVP message).=20 >=20 > - What class of application will benefit if your draft becomes a = standard? > Many Video/Multimedia/Collaboration applications will benefit = from these extensions because they will be able to perform pro-active = and controlled dynamic adjustment of codec/resolution/bandwidth. >=20 > - Is there another way to solve this problem (or might someone think = there is)? If so, explain how your solution is better. > IntServ/RSVP currently only allow signaling of a single = "bandwidth", so that dynamic sizing/resizing can only be achieved = through successive trial-and-errors involving multiple signaling round = trips. This increases session establishment times and results in = transient loss of any reservation in case of necessary mid-session = bandwidth reduction. The proposed extension allow reservation = sizing/resizing in a single round-trip and allow to maintain the base = reservation in case of mid-session bandwidth reduction. > draft-ietf-avt-ecn-for-rtp discusses how explicit congestion = notification (ECN) can be used by endpoints to perform dynamic rate = adjustment in a reactive manner. This reactive approach is expected to = be suitable in environments where resource reservation is not available. = However, in environments where resource reservation is available, it is = expected that a proactive approach based on the proposed Intserv/RSVP = extensions) will be used because of its benefits. These benefits include = determinism/control in the apportionment of resources (because the = arbitration is performed by the network in accordance with the network = administrator policy, as opposed to individually by endpoints) and = strict QoS protection (because adjustment can take place before any = congestion -or early congestion- occurs, as opposed to a reactive = approach depending on congestion -or early congestion- detection). >=20 > - What community of users will benefit from this work? > Enterprises using Video/Multimedia/Collaboration applications = wanting to perform pro-active and controlled dynamic adjustment of = codec/bandwidth.=20 > Service Providers offering managed = Voice/Multimedia/Collaboration applications to Enterprise customers. >=20 From gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk Thu Jul 8 07:46:05 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rsvp-dir@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: rsvp-dir@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CB3A3A6924 for ; Thu, 8 Jul 2010 07:46:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DWXwf0GcmIOG for ; Thu, 8 Jul 2010 07:46:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from erg.abdn.ac.uk (dee.erg.abdn.ac.uk [IPv6:2001:630:241:204:203:baff:fe9a:8c9b]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D97963A6AD0 for ; Thu, 8 Jul 2010 07:46:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gorry-mac.erg.abdn.ac.uk (gorry-mac.erg.abdn.ac.uk [139.133.207.5]) (authenticated bits=0) by erg.abdn.ac.uk (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id o68Ek2T6014157 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Thu, 8 Jul 2010 15:46:02 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <4C35E4AA.2050604@erg.abdn.ac.uk> Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2010 15:46:02 +0100 From: Gorry Fairhurst Organization: The University of Aberdeen is a charity registered in Scotland, No SC013683. User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Macintosh/20100228) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsvp-dir@ietf.org References: <201005101816.o4AIGdHL021437@sj-core-2.cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <201005101816.o4AIGdHL021437@sj-core-2.cisco.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ERG-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-ERG-MailScanner-From: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 08 Jul 2010 09:47:46 -0700 Cc: Gorry Fairhurst Subject: Re: [rsvp-dir] RSVP directorate formed X-BeenThere: rsvp-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk List-Id: RSVP directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2010 14:46:05 -0000 Hello RSVP directorate! Now that a directorate exists, I'd like help in two ways to manage the RSVP work in TSVWG: 1) I'm assuming that you will help with selecting appropriate work for adoption of TSVWG (as per the top bullet below). How do you see this working, specifically there are a number of drafts that currently have not become work items - despite author pleas - while we waited for clarification of how to handle RSVP work. Undoubtedly I'll be asked if these can become work items. As usual I'll push-back on need to do the work, and people to review/contribute to the drafts. Are there current drafts know to the directorate that would seem ready and important enough that the WG should consider taking these on? 2) Would someone from the directorate like to say "hi we're here and this is our remit" - taht would be helpful in the tsvwg meeting! Gorry > At 08:01 AM 5/10/2010, Lars Eggert wrote: >> Hi, >> >> following the discussion during the IETF-77 TSVAREA meeting on how to >> better review and progress extensions to (non-TE) RSVP and IntServ, >> the transport area directors have formed a new RSVP directorate and >> given it these tasks: >> >> * Review of all new work related to RSVP and Integrated Services that >> is proposed for IETF adoption. The purpose of this review is to >> advise the ADs and the chairs of the Transport Area Working Group >> (TSVWG) on whether a particular proposal should be taken on as a >> work item. The directorate will continue to guide and review such >> new work in TSVWG until it is ready for publication as an RFC. >> >> * Review of selected documents during IETF last call or under IESG >> review. The directorate monitors ongoing IETF work and should >> independently decide when a document will benefit from their review, >> assign a reviewer and enter into a follow-on discussion with the >> authors. When deemed necessary, the area directors will on occasion >> directly consult the directorate while forming their opinion on >> selected documents being under review by the IESG. >> >> * Cross-working group review. RSVP documents may have relevance to >> several working groups, including TSVWG and MPLS-related groups >> such as MPLS WG and CCAMP WG. The directorate will ensure that >> drafts submitted to TSV WG are reviewed in the appropriate >> MPLS-related >> WGs if necessary, and will bring drafts from the MPLS-related WGs >> to the attention of the TSV WG as appropriate. >> >> The directorate can be reached at rsv-dir@ietf.org. Additional >> information about the directorate is at >> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/tsv/trac/wiki/RSVP-Directorate. >> >> Lars > > From bdavie@cisco.com Thu Jul 8 10:05:24 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rsvp-dir@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: rsvp-dir@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B17273A6B1B for ; Thu, 8 Jul 2010 10:05:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -9.299 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id utthnPlw5T8w for ; Thu, 8 Jul 2010 10:05:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sj-iport-5.cisco.com (sj-iport-5.cisco.com [171.68.10.87]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35C163A6B41 for ; Thu, 8 Jul 2010 10:05:23 -0700 (PDT) Authentication-Results: sj-iport-5.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEAOOhNUyrRN+J/2dsb2JhbACgMXGmapp6gmOCQgSIQokr X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.53,559,1272844800"; d="scan'208";a="223604376" Received: from sj-core-3.cisco.com ([171.68.223.137]) by sj-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 08 Jul 2010 17:05:27 +0000 Received: from [10.32.241.76] ([10.32.241.76]) by sj-core-3.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o68H5QPG020750; Thu, 8 Jul 2010 17:05:27 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Bruce Davie In-Reply-To: <4C35E4AA.2050604@erg.abdn.ac.uk> Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2010 13:05:25 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <6E96BEC6-1520-4F01-B6F9-3BD9A1C77865@cisco.com> References: <201005101816.o4AIGdHL021437@sj-core-2.cisco.com> <4C35E4AA.2050604@erg.abdn.ac.uk> To: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081) Cc: rsvp-dir@ietf.org Subject: Re: [rsvp-dir] RSVP directorate formed X-BeenThere: rsvp-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: RSVP directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2010 17:05:24 -0000 Gorry, I have asked the directorate to start by looking at 3 drafts that have = been proposed as WG items: draft-narayanan-tsvwg-rsvp-resource-sharing-02=20 draft-lefaucheur-tsvwg-rsvp-multiple-preemption-02.txt draft-polk-tsvwg-intserv-multiple-tspec-03.txt In response to some questions from Bob Briscoe, I then asked all the = authors to provide short justifications for why their drafts should be = adopted (I can pass these on to you if that would be helpful). With that information in hand, I have asked the directorate to try to = get some reviews done before the upcoming meeting. Unfortunately, I am unable to attend the meeting in Maastricht. I agree, = it would be great if one of the other directorate members were to = introduce our little team in the meeting. Any volunteers? Bruce On Jul 8, 2010, at 10:46 AM, Gorry Fairhurst wrote: >=20 > Hello RSVP directorate! >=20 > Now that a directorate exists, I'd like help in two ways to manage the = RSVP work in TSVWG: >=20 > 1) I'm assuming that you will help with selecting appropriate work for = adoption of TSVWG (as per the top bullet below). How do you see this = working, specifically there are a number of drafts that currently have = not become work items - despite author pleas - while we waited for = clarification of how to handle RSVP work. Undoubtedly I'll be asked if = these can become work items. As usual I'll push-back on need to do the = work, and people to review/contribute to the drafts. Are there current = drafts know to the directorate that would seem ready and important = enough that the WG should consider taking these on? >=20 > 2) Would someone from the directorate like to say "hi we're here and = this is our remit" - taht would be helpful in the tsvwg meeting! >=20 > Gorry >=20 >> At 08:01 AM 5/10/2010, Lars Eggert wrote: >>> Hi, >>>=20 >>> following the discussion during the IETF-77 TSVAREA meeting on how = to better review and progress extensions to (non-TE) RSVP and IntServ, = the transport area directors have formed a new RSVP directorate and = given it these tasks: >>>=20 >>> * Review of all new work related to RSVP and Integrated Services = that >>> is proposed for IETF adoption. The purpose of this review is to >>> advise the ADs and the chairs of the Transport Area Working Group >>> (TSVWG) on whether a particular proposal should be taken on as a >>> work item. The directorate will continue to guide and review such >>> new work in TSVWG until it is ready for publication as an RFC. >>>=20 >>> * Review of selected documents during IETF last call or under IESG >>> review. The directorate monitors ongoing IETF work and should >>> independently decide when a document will benefit from their = review, >>> assign a reviewer and enter into a follow-on discussion with the >>> authors. When deemed necessary, the area directors will on = occasion >>> directly consult the directorate while forming their opinion on >>> selected documents being under review by the IESG. >>>=20 >>> * Cross-working group review. RSVP documents may have relevance to >>> several working groups, including TSVWG and MPLS-related groups >>> such as MPLS WG and CCAMP WG. The directorate will ensure that >>> drafts submitted to TSV WG are reviewed in the appropriate = MPLS-related >>> WGs if necessary, and will bring drafts from the MPLS-related WGs >>> to the attention of the TSV WG as appropriate. >>>=20 >>> The directorate can be reached at rsv-dir@ietf.org. Additional = information about the directorate is at = http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/tsv/trac/wiki/RSVP-Directorate. >>>=20 >>> Lars >=20 > _______________________________________________ > rsvp-dir mailing list > rsvp-dir@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rsvp-dir From gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk Thu Jul 8 10:28:29 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rsvp-dir@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: rsvp-dir@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 223483A6857 for ; Thu, 8 Jul 2010 10:28:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UAlQPWeM70Cr for ; Thu, 8 Jul 2010 10:28:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from erg.abdn.ac.uk (dee.erg.abdn.ac.uk [IPv6:2001:630:241:204:203:baff:fe9a:8c9b]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCD993A6B38 for ; Thu, 8 Jul 2010 10:28:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from GorryMacBookPro.local (fgrpf.plus.com [212.159.18.54]) (authenticated bits=0) by erg.abdn.ac.uk (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id o68HSKi3017369 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Thu, 8 Jul 2010 18:28:22 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <4C360AB3.5050409@erg.abdn.ac.uk> Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2010 18:28:19 +0100 From: Gorry Fairhurst Organization: The University of Aberdeen is a charity registered in Scotland, No SC013683. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.1.10) Gecko/20100512 Thunderbird/3.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bruce Davie , rsvp-dir@ietf.org References: <201005101816.o4AIGdHL021437@sj-core-2.cisco.com> <4C35E4AA.2050604@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <6E96BEC6-1520-4F01-B6F9-3BD9A1C77865@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <6E96BEC6-1520-4F01-B6F9-3BD9A1C77865@cisco.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ERG-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-ERG-MailScanner-From: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk Subject: Re: [rsvp-dir] RSVP directorate formed X-BeenThere: rsvp-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk List-Id: RSVP directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2010 17:28:29 -0000 Thanks Bruce Yes please do send me the author's rationale for why this is important to the WG (that would be helpful). Is anyone willing to say a few words at the TSVWG meeting (with or without slides)? Gorry On 08/07/2010 18:05, Bruce Davie wrote: > Gorry, > I have asked the directorate to start by looking at 3 drafts that have been proposed as WG items: > > draft-narayanan-tsvwg-rsvp-resource-sharing-02 > > draft-lefaucheur-tsvwg-rsvp-multiple-preemption-02.txt > draft-polk-tsvwg-intserv-multiple-tspec-03.txt > > In response to some questions from Bob Briscoe, I then asked all the authors to provide short justifications for why their drafts should be adopted (I can pass these on to you if that would be helpful). > > With that information in hand, I have asked the directorate to try to get some reviews done before the upcoming meeting. > > Unfortunately, I am unable to attend the meeting in Maastricht. I agree, it would be great if one of the other directorate members were to introduce our little team in the meeting. Any volunteers? > > Bruce > > > On Jul 8, 2010, at 10:46 AM, Gorry Fairhurst wrote: > >> >> Hello RSVP directorate! >> >> Now that a directorate exists, I'd like help in two ways to manage the RSVP work in TSVWG: >> >> 1) I'm assuming that you will help with selecting appropriate work for adoption of TSVWG (as per the top bullet below). How do you see this working, specifically there are a number of drafts that currently have not become work items - despite author pleas - while we waited for clarification of how to handle RSVP work. Undoubtedly I'll be asked if these can become work items. As usual I'll push-back on need to do the work, and people to review/contribute to the drafts. Are there current drafts know to the directorate that would seem ready and important enough that the WG should consider taking these on? >> >> 2) Would someone from the directorate like to say "hi we're here and this is our remit" - taht would be helpful in the tsvwg meeting! >> >> Gorry >> >>> At 08:01 AM 5/10/2010, Lars Eggert wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> following the discussion during the IETF-77 TSVAREA meeting on how to better review and progress extensions to (non-TE) RSVP and IntServ, the transport area directors have formed a new RSVP directorate and given it these tasks: >>>> >>>> * Review of all new work related to RSVP and Integrated Services that >>>> is proposed for IETF adoption. The purpose of this review is to >>>> advise the ADs and the chairs of the Transport Area Working Group >>>> (TSVWG) on whether a particular proposal should be taken on as a >>>> work item. The directorate will continue to guide and review such >>>> new work in TSVWG until it is ready for publication as an RFC. >>>> >>>> * Review of selected documents during IETF last call or under IESG >>>> review. The directorate monitors ongoing IETF work and should >>>> independently decide when a document will benefit from their review, >>>> assign a reviewer and enter into a follow-on discussion with the >>>> authors. When deemed necessary, the area directors will on occasion >>>> directly consult the directorate while forming their opinion on >>>> selected documents being under review by the IESG. >>>> >>>> * Cross-working group review. RSVP documents may have relevance to >>>> several working groups, including TSVWG and MPLS-related groups >>>> such as MPLS WG and CCAMP WG. The directorate will ensure that >>>> drafts submitted to TSV WG are reviewed in the appropriate MPLS-related >>>> WGs if necessary, and will bring drafts from the MPLS-related WGs >>>> to the attention of the TSV WG as appropriate. >>>> >>>> The directorate can be reached at rsv-dir@ietf.org. Additional information about the directorate is at http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/tsv/trac/wiki/RSVP-Directorate. >>>> >>>> Lars >> >> _______________________________________________ >> rsvp-dir mailing list >> rsvp-dir@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rsvp-dir > > > From ietfdbh@comcast.net Thu Jul 8 11:41:59 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rsvp-dir@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: rsvp-dir@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 881663A679C for ; Thu, 8 Jul 2010 11:41:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.985 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.985 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.614, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4vN7gv7S7qRu for ; Thu, 8 Jul 2010 11:41:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from qmta10.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net (qmta10.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net [76.96.62.17]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C53D3A686C for ; Thu, 8 Jul 2010 11:41:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from omta15.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.87]) by qmta10.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id fR5V1e0031swQuc5AWi3Ff; Thu, 08 Jul 2010 18:42:03 +0000 Received: from 23FX1C1 ([67.189.235.106]) by omta15.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id fWi21e0112JQnJT3bWi28X; Thu, 08 Jul 2010 18:42:03 +0000 From: "David Harrington" To: "'Bruce Davie'" , References: <201005101816.o4AIGdHL021437@sj-core-2.cisco.com><4C35E4AA.2050604@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <6E96BEC6-1520-4F01-B6F9-3BD9A1C77865@cisco.com> Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2010 14:42:05 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Thread-Index: Acsev8Vs0zhOg8dyRVWyGyEPo1ziKAABtamg In-Reply-To: <6E96BEC6-1520-4F01-B6F9-3BD9A1C77865@cisco.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5931 Cc: rsvp-dir@ietf.org Subject: Re: [rsvp-dir] RSVP directorate formed X-BeenThere: rsvp-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: RSVP directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2010 18:41:59 -0000 Hi, A few questions. Is there any progress on "RSVP-Directorate-Reviews describes the current guidelines for RSVP directorate reviewers"? It would be good to have some consistency to review criteria about whether a proposal is "worthy". Will you build this interacively using a wiki, or is somebody going to take an action item to do this? How will recommendations about which WG should consider adopting the drafts be made? which criteria will be used to justify a recommendation for passing a draft to a specific WG? It will obviously be a WG choice to decide whether to adopt a draft. So will you recommendation be made to the suthor "we think you should take it to WG XXX" or to the WG "we think the WG should look at draft XXX, because we think the draft is worthy of considerations and we think it fits within your WG scope"? Can we make sure that reviews and supporting documents get posted to the rsvp-dir archive? is the rsvp-dir archive private or public? dbh > -----Original Message----- > From: rsvp-dir-bounces@ietf.org > [mailto:rsvp-dir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Davie > Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2010 1:05 PM > To: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk > Cc: rsvp-dir@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [rsvp-dir] RSVP directorate formed > > Gorry, > I have asked the directorate to start by looking at 3 drafts > that have been proposed as WG items: > > draft-narayanan-tsvwg-rsvp-resource-sharing-02 > > draft-lefaucheur-tsvwg-rsvp-multiple-preemption-02.txt > draft-polk-tsvwg-intserv-multiple-tspec-03.txt > > In response to some questions from Bob Briscoe, I then asked > all the authors to provide short justifications for why their > drafts should be adopted (I can pass these on to you if that > would be helpful). > > With that information in hand, I have asked the directorate > to try to get some reviews done before the upcoming meeting. > > Unfortunately, I am unable to attend the meeting in > Maastricht. I agree, it would be great if one of the other > directorate members were to introduce our little team in the > meeting. Any volunteers? > > Bruce > > > On Jul 8, 2010, at 10:46 AM, Gorry Fairhurst wrote: > > > > > Hello RSVP directorate! > > > > Now that a directorate exists, I'd like help in two ways to > manage the RSVP work in TSVWG: > > > > 1) I'm assuming that you will help with selecting > appropriate work for adoption of TSVWG (as per the top bullet > below). How do you see this working, specifically there are a > number of drafts that currently have not become work items - > despite author pleas - while we waited for clarification of > how to handle RSVP work. Undoubtedly I'll be asked if these > can become work items. As usual I'll push-back on need to do > the work, and people to review/contribute to the drafts. Are > there current drafts know to the directorate that would seem > ready and important enough that the WG should consider taking > these on? > > > > 2) Would someone from the directorate like to say "hi we're > here and this is our remit" - taht would be helpful in the > tsvwg meeting! > > > > Gorry > > > >> At 08:01 AM 5/10/2010, Lars Eggert wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> following the discussion during the IETF-77 TSVAREA > meeting on how to better review and progress extensions to > (non-TE) RSVP and IntServ, the transport area directors have > formed a new RSVP directorate and given it these tasks: > >>> > >>> * Review of all new work related to RSVP and Integrated > Services that > >>> is proposed for IETF adoption. The purpose of this review is to > >>> advise the ADs and the chairs of the Transport Area > Working Group > >>> (TSVWG) on whether a particular proposal should be > taken on as a > >>> work item. The directorate will continue to guide and > review such > >>> new work in TSVWG until it is ready for publication as an RFC. > >>> > >>> * Review of selected documents during IETF last call or > under IESG > >>> review. The directorate monitors ongoing IETF work and should > >>> independently decide when a document will benefit from > their review, > >>> assign a reviewer and enter into a follow-on > discussion with the > >>> authors. When deemed necessary, the area directors > will on occasion > >>> directly consult the directorate while forming their opinion on > >>> selected documents being under review by the IESG. > >>> > >>> * Cross-working group review. RSVP documents may have > relevance to > >>> several working groups, including TSVWG and MPLS-related groups > >>> such as MPLS WG and CCAMP WG. The directorate will ensure that > >>> drafts submitted to TSV WG are reviewed in the > appropriate MPLS-related > >>> WGs if necessary, and will bring drafts from the > MPLS-related WGs > >>> to the attention of the TSV WG as appropriate. > >>> > >>> The directorate can be reached at rsv-dir@ietf.org. > Additional information about the directorate is at > http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/tsv/trac/wiki/RSVP-Directorate. > >>> > >>> Lars > > > > _______________________________________________ > > rsvp-dir mailing list > > rsvp-dir@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rsvp-dir > > _______________________________________________ > rsvp-dir mailing list > rsvp-dir@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rsvp-dir From bdavie@cisco.com Wed Jul 14 09:56:49 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rsvp-dir@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: rsvp-dir@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 298143A6A75 for ; Wed, 14 Jul 2010 09:56:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tJtigX8Zqq2T for ; Wed, 14 Jul 2010 09:56:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sj-iport-1.cisco.com (sj-iport-1.cisco.com [171.71.176.70]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F107A3A6A68 for ; Wed, 14 Jul 2010 09:56:47 -0700 (PDT) Authentication-Results: sj-iport-1.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEALKJPUyrR7Ht/2dsb2JhbACfa3GmKJpWhSQEiFA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.55,202,1278288000"; d="scan'208";a="343962057" Received: from sj-core-1.cisco.com ([171.71.177.237]) by sj-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 14 Jul 2010 16:56:42 +0000 Received: from [10.32.241.71] ([10.32.241.71]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o6EGufJh024140; Wed, 14 Jul 2010 16:56:42 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Bruce Davie In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2010 12:56:41 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <201005101816.o4AIGdHL021437@sj-core-2.cisco.com><4C35E4AA.2050604@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <6E96BEC6-1520-4F01-B6F9-3BD9A1C77865@cisco.com> To: David Harrington X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081) Cc: rsvp-dir@ietf.org Subject: Re: [rsvp-dir] RSVP directorate formed X-BeenThere: rsvp-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: RSVP directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2010 16:56:49 -0000 On Jul 8, 2010, at 2:42 PM, David Harrington wrote: > Hi, >=20 > A few questions. Some answers below. >=20 > Is there any progress on=20 > "RSVP-Directorate-Reviews describes the current guidelines for RSVP > directorate reviewers"? > It would be good to have some consistency to review criteria about > whether a proposal is "worthy". > Will you build this interacively using a wiki, or is somebody going to > take an action item to do this? While we've had discussion on the list about what the criteria are, it = hasn't been documented there. I agree that would be good, so I'll put it = on my to-do list, but of course other members of the Directorate are = welcome to jump in. >=20 > How will recommendations about which WG should consider adopting the > drafts be made? > which criteria will be used to justify a recommendation for passing a > draft to a specific WG? I think the criteria will follow from what I asked the authors to = provide for the 3 drafts under current consideration, which I include = below: > - What problem with existing RSVP/Intserv are you trying to solve? > - What class of application will benefit if your draft becomes a = standard? > - Is there another way to solve this problem (or might someone think = there is)? If so, explain how your solution is better. > - What new capability will we have if this draft becomes a standard? > - What community of users will benefit from this work? If the directorate feels that the draft solves a real problem, benefits = some class of apps & users, doesn't simply replicate another existing = solution, etc, then that would I think form the basis for a = recommendation to take it to the WG. And of course it should be = technically solid enough to start a WG effort (but would not need to be = perfect, of course, to start with). > It will obviously be a WG choice to decide whether to adopt a draft. > So will you recommendation be made to the suthor "we think you should > take it to WG XXX" or to the WG "we think the WG should look at draft > XXX, because we think the draft is worthy of considerations and we > think it fits within your WG scope"? I was imagining the latter. >=20 > Can we make sure that reviews and supporting documents get posted to > the rsvp-dir archive? Sure > is the rsvp-dir archive private or public? >=20 I would argue for private. Anything that we want to be public should be = sent to the appropriate WG, IMHO. Bruce > dbh >=20 >> -----Original Message----- >> From: rsvp-dir-bounces@ietf.org=20 >> [mailto:rsvp-dir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Davie >> Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2010 1:05 PM >> To: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk >> Cc: rsvp-dir@ietf.org >> Subject: Re: [rsvp-dir] RSVP directorate formed >>=20 >> Gorry, >> I have asked the directorate to start by looking at 3 drafts=20 >> that have been proposed as WG items: >>=20 >> draft-narayanan-tsvwg-rsvp-resource-sharing-02=20 >>=20 >> draft-lefaucheur-tsvwg-rsvp-multiple-preemption-02.txt >> draft-polk-tsvwg-intserv-multiple-tspec-03.txt >>=20 >> In response to some questions from Bob Briscoe, I then asked=20 >> all the authors to provide short justifications for why their=20 >> drafts should be adopted (I can pass these on to you if that=20 >> would be helpful). >>=20 >> With that information in hand, I have asked the directorate=20 >> to try to get some reviews done before the upcoming meeting. >>=20 >> Unfortunately, I am unable to attend the meeting in=20 >> Maastricht. I agree, it would be great if one of the other=20 >> directorate members were to introduce our little team in the=20 >> meeting. Any volunteers? >>=20 >> Bruce >>=20 >>=20 >> On Jul 8, 2010, at 10:46 AM, Gorry Fairhurst wrote: >>=20 >>>=20 >>> Hello RSVP directorate! >>>=20 >>> Now that a directorate exists, I'd like help in two ways to=20 >> manage the RSVP work in TSVWG: >>>=20 >>> 1) I'm assuming that you will help with selecting=20 >> appropriate work for adoption of TSVWG (as per the top bullet=20 >> below). How do you see this working, specifically there are a=20 >> number of drafts that currently have not become work items -=20 >> despite author pleas - while we waited for clarification of=20 >> how to handle RSVP work. Undoubtedly I'll be asked if these=20 >> can become work items. As usual I'll push-back on need to do=20 >> the work, and people to review/contribute to the drafts. Are=20 >> there current drafts know to the directorate that would seem=20 >> ready and important enough that the WG should consider taking=20 >> these on? >>>=20 >>> 2) Would someone from the directorate like to say "hi we're=20 >> here and this is our remit" - taht would be helpful in the=20 >> tsvwg meeting! >>>=20 >>> Gorry >>>=20 >>>> At 08:01 AM 5/10/2010, Lars Eggert wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>>=20 >>>>> following the discussion during the IETF-77 TSVAREA=20 >> meeting on how to better review and progress extensions to=20 >> (non-TE) RSVP and IntServ, the transport area directors have=20 >> formed a new RSVP directorate and given it these tasks: >>>>>=20 >>>>> * Review of all new work related to RSVP and Integrated=20 >> Services that >>>>> is proposed for IETF adoption. The purpose of this review is > to >>>>> advise the ADs and the chairs of the Transport Area=20 >> Working Group >>>>> (TSVWG) on whether a particular proposal should be=20 >> taken on as a >>>>> work item. The directorate will continue to guide and=20 >> review such >>>>> new work in TSVWG until it is ready for publication as an > RFC. >>>>>=20 >>>>> * Review of selected documents during IETF last call or=20 >> under IESG >>>>> review. The directorate monitors ongoing IETF work and should >>>>> independently decide when a document will benefit from=20 >> their review, >>>>> assign a reviewer and enter into a follow-on=20 >> discussion with the >>>>> authors. When deemed necessary, the area directors=20 >> will on occasion >>>>> directly consult the directorate while forming their opinion > on >>>>> selected documents being under review by the IESG. >>>>>=20 >>>>> * Cross-working group review. RSVP documents may have=20 >> relevance to >>>>> several working groups, including TSVWG and MPLS-related > groups >>>>> such as MPLS WG and CCAMP WG. The directorate will ensure > that >>>>> drafts submitted to TSV WG are reviewed in the=20 >> appropriate MPLS-related >>>>> WGs if necessary, and will bring drafts from the=20 >> MPLS-related WGs >>>>> to the attention of the TSV WG as appropriate. >>>>>=20 >>>>> The directorate can be reached at rsv-dir@ietf.org.=20 >> Additional information about the directorate is at=20 >> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/tsv/trac/wiki/RSVP-Directorate. >>>>>=20 >>>>> Lars >>>=20 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> rsvp-dir mailing list >>> rsvp-dir@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rsvp-dir >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> rsvp-dir mailing list >> rsvp-dir@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rsvp-dir >=20 From flefauch@cisco.com Tue Jul 27 06:25:46 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rsvp-dir@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: rsvp-dir@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E90423A6901; Tue, 27 Jul 2010 06:25:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -9.178 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.178 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, SARE_GIF_ATTACH=1.42] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VH1nRn1XQbKa; Tue, 27 Jul 2010 06:25:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sj-iport-6.cisco.com (sj-iport-6.cisco.com [171.71.176.117]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C1E83A6802; Tue, 27 Jul 2010 06:25:45 -0700 (PDT) Authentication-Results: sj-iport-6.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-Files: logo.gif, green.gif : 837, 87 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.55,267,1278288000"; d="gif'147?scan'147,208,217,147";a="564410737" Received: from sj-core-2.cisco.com ([171.71.177.254]) by sj-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 27 Jul 2010 13:26:07 +0000 Received: from [10.21.77.126] ([10.21.77.126]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o6RDQ5od022988; Tue, 27 Jul 2010 13:26:06 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-331--865223411 From: Francois Le Faucheur In-Reply-To: <18520724-3155-4699-BA8F-0858F6870D98@cisco.com> Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 15:26:10 +0200 Message-Id: <9E2A1330-CE48-4600-8011-78D7687FBF9F@cisco.com> References: <18520724-3155-4699-BA8F-0858F6870D98@cisco.com> To: Le Faucheur Francois , rsvp-dir@ietf.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081) Cc: "tsvwg-chairs@tools.ietf.org chair" , tsvwg WG Subject: [rsvp-dir] Update from RSVP directorate on RSVP Candidate items? X-BeenThere: rsvp-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: RSVP directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 13:25:47 -0000 --Apple-Mail-331--865223411 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Hello RSVP Directorate, Any chance to get an update from RSVP Directorate regarding the = submitted RSVP candidate items before TSVWG (Thur am)? I believe the submitted candidate items are: * RSVP Multi-TSPEC/Multi-PREEMPTION * RSVP Flexible Resource Sharing Also, for memory: * the meaty part of = "draft-narayanan-tsvwg-rsvp-resource-sharing" has been merged into = "draft-berger-ccamp-assoc-info" * so the latest version of = "draft-narayanan-tsvwg-rsvp-resource-sharing" only contains a smaller = optional delta on top of "draft-berger-ccamp-assoc-info" * the CCAMP plan is that "draft-berger-ccamp-assoc-info" be = progressed in CCAMP * I believe CCAMP is also proposing to progress = "draft-narayanan-tsvwg-rsvp-resource-sharing" as a companion document = (this proposal does make sense to me since, again, the real meat is in = "draft-berger-ccamp-assoc-info"). It would be good to get views on this plan. Thanks Francois >=20 > On 10 May 2010, at 15:01, Lars Eggert wrote: >=20 >> Hi, >>=20 >> following the discussion during the IETF-77 TSVAREA meeting on how to = better review and progress extensions to (non-TE) RSVP and IntServ, the = transport area directors have formed a new RSVP directorate and given it = these tasks: >>=20 >> * Review of all new work related to RSVP and Integrated Services = that >> is proposed for IETF adoption. The purpose of this review is to >> advise the ADs and the chairs of the Transport Area Working Group >> (TSVWG) on whether a particular proposal should be taken on as a >> work item. The directorate will continue to guide and review such >> new work in TSVWG until it is ready for publication as an RFC. >>=20 >> * Review of selected documents during IETF last call or under IESG >> review. The directorate monitors ongoing IETF work and should >> independently decide when a document will benefit from their = review, >> assign a reviewer and enter into a follow-on discussion with the >> authors. When deemed necessary, the area directors will on = occasion >> directly consult the directorate while forming their opinion on >> selected documents being under review by the IESG. >>=20 >> * Cross-working group review. RSVP documents may have relevance to >> several working groups, including TSVWG and MPLS-related groups >> such as MPLS WG and CCAMP WG. The directorate will ensure that >> drafts submitted to TSV WG are reviewed in the appropriate = MPLS-related >> WGs if necessary, and will bring drafts from the MPLS-related WGs >> to the attention of the TSV WG as appropriate. >>=20 >> The directorate can be reached at rsv-dir@ietf.org. Additional = information about the directorate is at = http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/tsv/trac/wiki/RSVP-Directorate. >>=20 >> Lars >=20 Francois Le Faucheur Distinguished Engineer Corporate Development flefauch@cisco.com Phone: +33 49 723 2619 Mobile: +33 6 19 98 50 90 Cisco Systems France Greenside 400 Ave de Roumanille 06410 Sophia Antipolis France Cisco.com =20 Think before you print. This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole = use of the intended recipient. Any review, use, distribution or = disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended = recipient (or authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact = the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message. Cisco Systems France, Soci=E9t=E9 =E0 responsabiit=E9 limit=E9e, Rue = Camille Desmoulins =96 Imm Atlantis Zac Forum Seine Ilot 7 92130 Issy = les Moulineaux, Au capital de 91.470 =80, 349 166 561 RCS Nanterre, = Directeur de la publication: Jean-Luc Michel Givone. For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html --Apple-Mail-331--865223411 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="text/html"; boundary=Apple-Mail-332--865223410 --Apple-Mail-332--865223410 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 * = RSVP Multi-TSPEC/Multi-PREEMPTION
* RSVP = Flexible Resource Sharing

Also, for = memory:
* the meaty part of = "draft-narayanan-tsvwg-rsvp-resource-sharing" has been merged into = "draft-berger-ccamp-assoc-info"
* so the latest version = of "draft-narayanan-tsvwg-rsvp-resource-sharing" only contains a = smaller optional delta on top = of "draft-berger-ccamp-assoc-info"
* the = CCAMP plan is that "draft-berger-ccamp-assoc-info" be progressed in = CCAMP
= * I believe CCAMP is also proposing to = progress "draft-narayanan-tsvwg-rsvp-resource-sharing" as a = companion document (this proposal does make sense to me since, again, = the real meat is = in "draft-berger-ccamp-assoc-info").

It = would be good to get  views on this = plan.

Thanks

Francois


On 10 May 2010, at 15:01, Lars = Eggert wrote:

Hi,

following the discussion during the = IETF-77 TSVAREA meeting on how to better review and progress extensions = to (non-TE) RSVP and IntServ, the transport area directors have formed a = new RSVP directorate and given it these tasks:

 * Review of = all new work related to RSVP and Integrated Services that
=    is proposed for IETF adoption. The purpose of this = review is to
   advise the ADs and the chairs of the = Transport Area Working Group
   (TSVWG) on whether a = particular proposal should be taken on as a
   work = item. The directorate will continue to guide and review such
=    new work in TSVWG until it is ready for publication as = an RFC.

 * Review of selected documents during IETF last = call or under IESG
   review. The directorate = monitors ongoing IETF work and should
=    independently decide when a document will benefit from = their review,
   assign a reviewer and enter into a = follow-on discussion with the
   authors. When deemed = necessary, the area directors will on occasion
=    directly consult the directorate while forming their = opinion on
   selected documents being under review = by the IESG.

 * Cross-working group review. RSVP documents = may have relevance to
   several working groups, = including TSVWG and MPLS-related groups
   such as = MPLS WG and CCAMP WG. The directorate will ensure that
=    drafts submitted to TSV WG are reviewed in the = appropriate MPLS-related
   WGs if necessary, and = will bring drafts from the MPLS-related WGs
   to the = attention of the TSV WG as appropriate.

The directorate can be = reached at rsv-dir@ietf.org. = Additional information about the directorate is at ht= tp://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/tsv/trac/wiki/RSVP-Directorate.

L= ars



Francois Le = Faucheur
Distinguished = Engineer
Corporate Development

Cisco Systems = France
Greenside
400 Ave de Roumanille
06410 Sophia = Antipolis
France
Cisco.com

 
 Think before you = print.
R0lGODlhbgBJAMQAAP///3OXqtapqq1MTcmRki9mgZkAALpqbMl/f6g5O/Xq6+vX2OTIyaMqK/nz 9OW/v5sVFsbV3Nfh5p0PD5kFBf78/P38/Pz6+v/+/rZdXpcKDKAhIvv396QvMO/g4Ny4uSH5BAAA AAAALAAAAABuAEkAQAX/ICCOZGmeaKqubOu+cCzPdG3feK6nkln8pp5LSPoVgrucsbQsAp1HKPM5 alapImtyy+16SwKDmJBCiBEWgMUsPgg8JMHEQCGTMACP2HDgiBQZYglfOQ+GDy2HhiqKKI2EkJGS k5SVlpeYmZpfWkpYmypEV1GjU6QjolmfnZ0AqZWvrj6fski2UiWxsZkcHxkNYg0IABUibAjFIgsH wAYNBwokvb8QEMIOJAwICQYQCQgLoCgLHWIdHwoKCwzExmdpGBwcxRgDYhkXAOTm6OoMfg4CiRGg wAOBOXzEKVzIsKHDhxAjSpxIsaKNCAEibMGo0WKLVjdAVgxQIICpEiRN/7JIeZIEy4WsVsk8BSAm TZstLb0csVMVzZ4AgALtJLQkRY4bM3pcupDAHgMduA1Q484AGmJO7x04kCCaCAIaxFCISmGAVwZP u+1pEK5hVgPYUBxLQ4yBvacfvlIwMCFuCbRi2I34sHfDQ0BpDUyFNxfABTZPGwgGACjsU7MiLLx9 ukEA08+gQ4seTbq06dOoU6tezbq169evd92QHRooDtujRdbQDZr3DN8RkeIaIXxFcZ8ljkPEOVwF 81ILlT9HTkL6zJwilE+aXvN68+43vUO3xL28eOrj0VdSbp0me6XV4acH8L6jRNw28IumXYM/7P8k PJLIISkIWIKBD3GwmcIYiwGAQWP6cJMWHCIoCEFamInwQTNPdYCIQwqUM8YCC3zgWTKNOXAAg14p kA9lIkJAAIkmYsPBim0YcsBeVjn0llcnQAjYHh14phdfQGazx2QAEGaAYQ2FMVAZ75BggTZ7HFCM HHQYWcICeyAjgormPASZYgN00CAAjV0gwAEEEACZlsbwCMEAaWb4wFMJJMDjBkwypAABErbRzoNn FFPBghnkRcKgCVimwQF+VSDAXXw1CuCmnHbq6aeghirqqDiEAAA7 --Apple-Mail-332--865223410 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline; filename=green.gif Content-Type: image/gif; name="green.gif" Content-Id: R0lGODlhEgATAJEAAAAAAP///wCZAP///yH5BAEAAAMALAAAAAASABMAAAIojI+pGyK8nINqUiTf bVnfvHEg1UmhdZRqaawu6XZVjKb0/CYxo8JOAQA7 --Apple-Mail-332--865223410-- --Apple-Mail-331--865223411-- From gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk Tue Jul 27 06:45:40 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rsvp-dir@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: rsvp-dir@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C31F3A6901; Tue, 27 Jul 2010 06:45:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id I7sSA0rbRVBl; Tue, 27 Jul 2010 06:45:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from erg.abdn.ac.uk (dee.erg.abdn.ac.uk [IPv6:2001:630:241:204:203:baff:fe9a:8c9b]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 717713A690F; Tue, 27 Jul 2010 06:45:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dhcp-66ee.meeting.ietf.org ([IPv6:2001:df8:0:96:21e:c2ff:febe:4c73]) (authenticated bits=0) by erg.abdn.ac.uk (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id o6RDjc7F008878 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Tue, 27 Jul 2010 14:45:39 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <4C4EE303.5080300@erg.abdn.ac.uk> Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 15:45:39 +0200 From: Gorry Fairhurst Organization: The University of Aberdeen is a charity registered in Scotland, No SC013683. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.1.10) Gecko/20100512 Thunderbird/3.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Francois Le Faucheur References: <18520724-3155-4699-BA8F-0858F6870D98@cisco.com> <9E2A1330-CE48-4600-8011-78D7687FBF9F@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <9E2A1330-CE48-4600-8011-78D7687FBF9F@cisco.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-ERG-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-ERG-MailScanner-From: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk Cc: rsvp-dir@ietf.org, "tsvwg-chairs@tools.ietf.org chair" , tsvwg WG Subject: Re: [rsvp-dir] Update from RSVP directorate on RSVP Candidate items? X-BeenThere: rsvp-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk List-Id: RSVP directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 13:45:40 -0000 It would indeed be good to get a summary of feedback from the rsvp directorate on these 2 drafts - please reply to tsv-ads and tsvwg-chairs, if it is appropriate, please also feel free to copy the tsvwg list. My understanding is that this consultation is to provide feedback for the ADs and Chairs. These inputs can help to determine if there is sufficient interest and a need to adopt a draft. The RSVP directorate are not enabled to make a decision on what drafts are adopted. If the directorate provide comments that support progression it may be helpful to also suggest some document reviewers who would commit to comment on the document both as it progresses through the WG *and* in the WGLC. Gorry On 27/07/2010 15:26, Francois Le Faucheur wrote: > Hello RSVP Directorate, > > Any chance to get an update from RSVP Directorate regarding the > submitted RSVP candidate items before TSVWG (Thur am)? > > I believe the submitted candidate items are: > * RSVP Multi-TSPEC/Multi-PREEMPTION > * RSVP Flexible Resource Sharing > > Also, for memory: > * the meaty part of "draft-narayanan-tsvwg-rsvp-resource-sharing" has > been merged into "draft-berger-ccamp-assoc-info" > * so the latest version of "draft-narayanan-tsvwg-rsvp-resource-sharing" > only contains a smaller optional delta on top of > "draft-berger-ccamp-assoc-info" > * the CCAMP plan is that "draft-berger-ccamp-assoc-info" be progressed > in CCAMP > * I believe CCAMP is also proposing to progress > "draft-narayanan-tsvwg-rsvp-resource-sharing" as a companion document > (this proposal does make sense to me since, again, the real meat is in > "draft-berger-ccamp-assoc-info"). > > It would be good to get views on this plan. > > Thanks > > Francois > >> >> On 10 May 2010, at 15:01, Lars Eggert wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> following the discussion during the IETF-77 TSVAREA meeting on how to >>> better review and progress extensions to (non-TE) RSVP and IntServ, >>> the transport area directors have formed a new RSVP directorate and >>> given it these tasks: >>> >>> * Review of all new work related to RSVP and Integrated Services that >>> is proposed for IETF adoption. The purpose of this review is to >>> advise the ADs and the chairs of the Transport Area Working Group >>> (TSVWG) on whether a particular proposal should be taken on as a >>> work item. The directorate will continue to guide and review such >>> new work in TSVWG until it is ready for publication as an RFC. >>> >>> * Review of selected documents during IETF last call or under IESG >>> review. The directorate monitors ongoing IETF work and should >>> independently decide when a document will benefit from their review, >>> assign a reviewer and enter into a follow-on discussion with the >>> authors. When deemed necessary, the area directors will on occasion >>> directly consult the directorate while forming their opinion on >>> selected documents being under review by the IESG. >>> >>> * Cross-working group review. RSVP documents may have relevance to >>> several working groups, including TSVWG and MPLS-related groups >>> such as MPLS WG and CCAMP WG. The directorate will ensure that >>> drafts submitted to TSV WG are reviewed in the appropriate MPLS-related >>> WGs if necessary, and will bring drafts from the MPLS-related WGs >>> to the attention of the TSV WG as appropriate. >>> >>> The directorate can be reached at rsv-dir@ietf.org >>> . Additional information about the >>> directorate is at >>> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/tsv/trac/wiki/RSVP-Directorate. >>> >>> Lars >> > > * > Francois Le Faucheur* > *Distinguished Engineer* > *Corporate Development* > flefauch@cisco.com > Phone: *+33 49 723 2619* > Mobile: *+33 6 19 98 50 90* > > > > > *Cisco Systems France* > Greenside > 400 Ave de Roumanille > 06410 Sophia Antipolis > France > Cisco.com > > > > Think before you print. > > This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole > use of the intended recipient. Any review, use, distribution or > disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended > recipient (or authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact > the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message. > > Cisco Systems France, Société à responsabiité limitée, Rue Camille > Desmoulins – Imm Atlantis Zac Forum Seine Ilot 7 92130 Issy les > Moulineaux, Au capital de 91.470 €, 349 166 561 RCS Nanterre, Directeur > de la publication: Jean-Luc Michel Givone. > > For corporate legal information go to: > http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html > > From bdavie@cisco.com Tue Jul 27 07:40:39 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rsvp-dir@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: rsvp-dir@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CACB3A69BC for ; Tue, 27 Jul 2010 07:40:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PSk1Od-LNN2p for ; Tue, 27 Jul 2010 07:40:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com (rtp-iport-1.cisco.com [64.102.122.148]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E09953A6BE0 for ; Tue, 27 Jul 2010 07:40:01 -0700 (PDT) Authentication-Results: rtp-iport-1.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEAGOMTkxAZnwN/2dsb2JhbACfZnGmTZtFAoU0BIhq X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.55,268,1278288000"; d="scan'208,217";a="139751061" Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com ([64.102.124.13]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 27 Jul 2010 14:40:23 +0000 Received: from dhcp-161-44-173-109.cisco.com (dhcp-161-44-173-109.cisco.com [161.44.173.109]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o6REeLUs011133 for ; Tue, 27 Jul 2010 14:40:21 GMT From: Bruce Davie Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-1--860772023 Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 10:40:22 -0400 References: <4C4EE303.5080300@erg.abdn.ac.uk> To: rsvp-dir@ietf.org Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081) Subject: [rsvp-dir] Fwd: Update from RSVP directorate on RSVP Candidate items? X-BeenThere: rsvp-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: RSVP directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 14:40:39 -0000 --Apple-Mail-1--860772023 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Directorate, I don't feel I can speak for the directorate at this point, as I have = only heard back from Bob Briscoe to date, and only with questions. For = the record, I am in favor of the WG adopting the 3 drafts that I asked = you to look at, but I'd like to hear from some more directorate members. Is anyone there? Bruce Begin forwarded message: > From: Gorry Fairhurst > Date: July 27, 2010 9:45:39 AM EDT > To: Francois Le Faucheur > Cc: rsvp-dir@ietf.org, "tsvwg-chairs@tools.ietf.org chair" = , tsvwg WG > Subject: Re: [rsvp-dir] Update from RSVP directorate on RSVP Candidate = items? > Reply-To: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk >=20 > It would indeed be good to get a summary of feedback from the rsvp = directorate on these 2 drafts - please reply to tsv-ads and = tsvwg-chairs, if it is appropriate, please also feel free to copy the = tsvwg list. >=20 > My understanding is that this consultation is to provide feedback for = the ADs and Chairs. These inputs can help to determine if there is = sufficient interest and a need to adopt a draft. The RSVP directorate = are not enabled to make a decision on what drafts are adopted. >=20 > If the directorate provide comments that support progression it may be = helpful to also suggest some document reviewers who would commit to = comment on the document both as it progresses through the WG *and* in = the WGLC. >=20 > Gorry >=20 > On 27/07/2010 15:26, Francois Le Faucheur wrote: >> Hello RSVP Directorate, >>=20 >> Any chance to get an update from RSVP Directorate regarding the >> submitted RSVP candidate items before TSVWG (Thur am)? >>=20 >> I believe the submitted candidate items are: >> * RSVP Multi-TSPEC/Multi-PREEMPTION >> * RSVP Flexible Resource Sharing >>=20 >> Also, for memory: >> * the meaty part of "draft-narayanan-tsvwg-rsvp-resource-sharing" has >> been merged into "draft-berger-ccamp-assoc-info" >> * so the latest version of = "draft-narayanan-tsvwg-rsvp-resource-sharing" >> only contains a smaller optional delta on top of >> "draft-berger-ccamp-assoc-info" >> * the CCAMP plan is that "draft-berger-ccamp-assoc-info" be = progressed >> in CCAMP >> * I believe CCAMP is also proposing to progress >> "draft-narayanan-tsvwg-rsvp-resource-sharing" as a companion document >> (this proposal does make sense to me since, again, the real meat is = in >> "draft-berger-ccamp-assoc-info"). >>=20 >> It would be good to get views on this plan. >>=20 >> Thanks >>=20 >> Francois >>=20 >>>=20 >>> On 10 May 2010, at 15:01, Lars Eggert wrote: >>>=20 >>>> Hi, >>>>=20 >>>> following the discussion during the IETF-77 TSVAREA meeting on how = to >>>> better review and progress extensions to (non-TE) RSVP and IntServ, >>>> the transport area directors have formed a new RSVP directorate and >>>> given it these tasks: >>>>=20 >>>> * Review of all new work related to RSVP and Integrated Services = that >>>> is proposed for IETF adoption. The purpose of this review is to >>>> advise the ADs and the chairs of the Transport Area Working Group >>>> (TSVWG) on whether a particular proposal should be taken on as a >>>> work item. The directorate will continue to guide and review such >>>> new work in TSVWG until it is ready for publication as an RFC. >>>>=20 >>>> * Review of selected documents during IETF last call or under IESG >>>> review. The directorate monitors ongoing IETF work and should >>>> independently decide when a document will benefit from their = review, >>>> assign a reviewer and enter into a follow-on discussion with the >>>> authors. When deemed necessary, the area directors will on occasion >>>> directly consult the directorate while forming their opinion on >>>> selected documents being under review by the IESG. >>>>=20 >>>> * Cross-working group review. RSVP documents may have relevance to >>>> several working groups, including TSVWG and MPLS-related groups >>>> such as MPLS WG and CCAMP WG. The directorate will ensure that >>>> drafts submitted to TSV WG are reviewed in the appropriate = MPLS-related >>>> WGs if necessary, and will bring drafts from the MPLS-related WGs >>>> to the attention of the TSV WG as appropriate. >>>>=20 >>>> The directorate can be reached at rsv-dir@ietf.org >>>> . Additional information about the >>>> directorate is at >>>> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/tsv/trac/wiki/RSVP-Directorate. >>>>=20 >>>> Lars >>>=20 >>=20 >> * >> Francois Le Faucheur* >> *Distinguished Engineer* >> *Corporate Development* >> flefauch@cisco.com >> Phone: *+33 49 723 2619* >> Mobile: *+33 6 19 98 50 90* >>=20 >>=20 >> =09 >>=20 >> *Cisco Systems France* >> Greenside >> 400 Ave de Roumanille >> 06410 Sophia Antipolis >> France >> Cisco.com >>=20 >> =09 >>=20 >> Think before you print. >>=20 >> This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the = sole >> use of the intended recipient. Any review, use, distribution or >> disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the = intended >> recipient (or authorized to receive for the recipient), please = contact >> the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message. >>=20 >> Cisco Systems France, Soci=E9t=E9 =E0 responsabiit=E9 limit=E9e, Rue = Camille >> Desmoulins =96 Imm Atlantis Zac Forum Seine Ilot 7 92130 Issy les >> Moulineaux, Au capital de 91.470 =80, 349 166 561 RCS Nanterre, = Directeur >> de la publication: Jean-Luc Michel Givone. >>=20 >> For corporate legal information go to: >> http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html >>=20 >>=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > rsvp-dir mailing list > rsvp-dir@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rsvp-dir --Apple-Mail-1--860772023 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252
From: Gorry Fairhurst = <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Date: July 27, 2010 = 9:45:39 AM EDT
To: Francois Le Faucheur <flefauch@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [rsvp-dir] = Update from RSVP directorate on RSVP Candidate = items?
Reply-To: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk

It would indeed be good to get a summary of feedback from = the rsvp directorate on these 2 drafts - please reply to tsv-ads and = tsvwg-chairs, if it is appropriate, please also feel free to copy the = tsvwg list.

My understanding is that this consultation is to = provide feedback for the ADs and Chairs. These inputs can help to = determine if there is sufficient interest and a need to adopt a draft. = The RSVP directorate are not enabled to make a decision on what drafts = are adopted.

If the directorate provide comments that support = progression it may be helpful to also suggest some document reviewers = who would commit to comment on the document both as it progresses = through the WG *and* in the WGLC.

Gorry

On 27/07/2010 = 15:26, Francois Le Faucheur wrote:
Hello = RSVP Directorate,

Any chance to = get an update from RSVP Directorate regarding = the
submitted RSVP candidate = items before TSVWG (Thur am)?

I believe the = submitted candidate items are:
*= RSVP Multi-TSPEC/Multi-PREEMPTION
* RSVP Flexible Resource = Sharing

Also, for = memory:
* the meaty part of = "draft-narayanan-tsvwg-rsvp-resource-sharing" = has
been merged into = "draft-berger-ccamp-assoc-info"
* so the latest version of = "draft-narayanan-tsvwg-rsvp-resource-sharing"
only contains a smaller optional delta on top = of
"draft-berger-ccamp-assoc-info"
* the CCAMP plan is that "draft-berger-ccamp-assoc-info" = be progressed
in = CCAMP
* I believe CCAMP is = also proposing to progress
"draft-narayanan-tsvwg-rsvp-resource-sharing" as a = companion document
(this = proposal does make sense to me since, again, the real meat is = in
"draft-berger-ccamp-assoc-info").

It would be = good to get views on this plan.

Thanks

Francois


On 10 May 2010, at 15:01, Lars = Eggert wrote:

Hi,

following the discussion during the IETF-77 TSVAREA = meeting on how to
better = review and progress extensions to (non-TE) RSVP and = IntServ,
the = transport area directors have formed a new RSVP directorate = and
given = it these tasks:

* = Review of all new work related to RSVP and Integrated Services = that
is = proposed for IETF adoption. The purpose of this review is = to
advise = the ADs and the chairs of the Transport Area Working = Group
(TSVWG) = on whether a particular proposal should be taken on as = a
work = item. The directorate will continue to guide and review = such
new = work in TSVWG until it is ready for publication as an = RFC.

* = Review of selected documents during IETF last call or under = IESG
review. = The directorate monitors ongoing IETF work and = should
independently decide when a document will benefit from = their review,
assign = a reviewer and enter into a follow-on discussion with = the
authors.= When deemed necessary, the area directors will on = occasion
directly= consult the directorate while forming their opinion = on
selected= documents being under review by the = IESG.

* = Cross-working group review. RSVP documents may have relevance = to
several = working groups, including TSVWG and MPLS-related = groups
such = as MPLS WG and CCAMP WG. The directorate will ensure = that
drafts = submitted to TSV WG are reviewed in the appropriate = MPLS-related
WGs if = necessary, and will bring drafts from the MPLS-related = WGs
to the = attention of the TSV WG as = appropriate.

The = directorate can be reached at rsv-dir@ietf.org
<mailto:rsv-dir@ietf.org>. = Additional information about = the
directorate is = at
ht= tp://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/tsv/trac/wiki/RSVP-Directorate.

Lars


*
Francois Le = Faucheur*
*Distinguished = Engineer*
*Corporate = Development*
flefauch@cisco.com <mailto:flefauch@cisco.com>
Phone: *+33 49 723 = 2619*
Mobile: *+33 6 19 98 50 = 90*


=

*Cisco Systems = France*
Greenside
400 = Ave de Roumanille
06410 Sophia = Antipolis
France
Cisco.com <http://www.cisco.com>

=

Think before = you print.

This email may = contain confidential and privileged material for the = sole
use of the intended = recipient. Any review, use, distribution or
disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are = not the intended
recipient (or = authorized to receive for the recipient), please = contact
the sender by reply = email and delete all copies of this message.

Cisco Systems = France, Soci=E9t=E9 =E0 responsabiit=E9 limit=E9e, Rue = Camille
Desmoulins =96 Imm = Atlantis Zac Forum Seine Ilot 7 92130 Issy = les
Moulineaux, Au capital de = 91.470 =80, 349 166 561 RCS Nanterre, = Directeur
de la publication: = Jean-Luc Michel Givone.

For corporate = legal information go to:
http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html



_______________________________________= ________
rsvp-dir mailing list
rsvp-dir@ietf.org
https://www.iet= f.org/mailman/listinfo/rsvp-dir

= --Apple-Mail-1--860772023-- From lixia@cs.ucla.edu Sat Jul 31 01:37:46 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rsvp-dir@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: rsvp-dir@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D05F3A6985 for ; Sat, 31 Jul 2010 01:37:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.002 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id laN8+7EO3Ya7 for ; Sat, 31 Jul 2010 01:37:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.cs.ucla.edu (smtp.cs.ucla.edu [131.179.128.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97F303A6912 for ; Sat, 31 Jul 2010 01:37:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id F05E739E810A; Sat, 31 Jul 2010 01:38:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at smtp.cs.ucla.edu Received: from smtp.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Gz1z1ew6TZt1; Sat, 31 Jul 2010 01:38:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ip212-238-38-207.hotspotsvankpn.com (ip212-238-38-207.hotspotsvankpn.com [212.238.38.207]) by smtp.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5C34C39E810D; Sat, 31 Jul 2010 01:38:07 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-10--539050539 From: Lixia Zhang In-Reply-To: Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2010 01:02:23 -0700 Message-Id: References: <4C4EE303.5080300@erg.abdn.ac.uk> To: Bruce Davie X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081) Cc: rsvp-dir@ietf.org Subject: Re: [rsvp-dir] Fwd: Update from RSVP directorate on RSVP Candidate items? X-BeenThere: rsvp-dir@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: RSVP directorate List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2010 08:37:46 -0000 --Apple-Mail-10--539050539 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 On Jul 27, 2010, at 7:40 AM, Bruce Davie wrote: > Directorate, > I don't feel I can speak for the directorate at this point, as I have = only heard back from Bob Briscoe to date, and only with questions. For = the record, I am in favor of the WG adopting the 3 drafts that I asked = you to look at, but I'd like to hear from some more directorate members. >=20 > Is anyone there? >=20 > Bruce My sincere apology! I finally caught up all the exchanges on this list on this train ride to = Amsterdam. I also talked to someone (forgot the name) at IETF about these drafts. Unfortunately I was unable to make to the TSVWG meeting due to conflict. I am also in favor of the WG adopting the 3 drafts. Lixia > Begin forwarded message: >=20 >> From: Gorry Fairhurst >> Date: July 27, 2010 9:45:39 AM EDT >> To: Francois Le Faucheur >> Cc: rsvp-dir@ietf.org, "tsvwg-chairs@tools.ietf.org chair" = , tsvwg WG >> Subject: Re: [rsvp-dir] Update from RSVP directorate on RSVP = Candidate items? >> Reply-To: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk >>=20 >> It would indeed be good to get a summary of feedback from the rsvp = directorate on these 2 drafts - please reply to tsv-ads and = tsvwg-chairs, if it is appropriate, please also feel free to copy the = tsvwg list. >>=20 >> My understanding is that this consultation is to provide feedback for = the ADs and Chairs. These inputs can help to determine if there is = sufficient interest and a need to adopt a draft. The RSVP directorate = are not enabled to make a decision on what drafts are adopted. >>=20 >> If the directorate provide comments that support progression it may = be helpful to also suggest some document reviewers who would commit to = comment on the document both as it progresses through the WG *and* in = the WGLC. >>=20 >> Gorry >>=20 >> On 27/07/2010 15:26, Francois Le Faucheur wrote: >>> Hello RSVP Directorate, >>>=20 >>> Any chance to get an update from RSVP Directorate regarding the >>> submitted RSVP candidate items before TSVWG (Thur am)? >>>=20 >>> I believe the submitted candidate items are: >>> * RSVP Multi-TSPEC/Multi-PREEMPTION >>> * RSVP Flexible Resource Sharing >>>=20 >>> Also, for memory: >>> * the meaty part of "draft-narayanan-tsvwg-rsvp-resource-sharing" = has >>> been merged into "draft-berger-ccamp-assoc-info" >>> * so the latest version of = "draft-narayanan-tsvwg-rsvp-resource-sharing" >>> only contains a smaller optional delta on top of >>> "draft-berger-ccamp-assoc-info" >>> * the CCAMP plan is that "draft-berger-ccamp-assoc-info" be = progressed >>> in CCAMP >>> * I believe CCAMP is also proposing to progress >>> "draft-narayanan-tsvwg-rsvp-resource-sharing" as a companion = document >>> (this proposal does make sense to me since, again, the real meat is = in >>> "draft-berger-ccamp-assoc-info"). >>>=20 >>> It would be good to get views on this plan. >>>=20 >>> Thanks >>>=20 >>> Francois >>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> On 10 May 2010, at 15:01, Lars Eggert wrote: >>>>=20 >>>>> Hi, >>>>>=20 >>>>> following the discussion during the IETF-77 TSVAREA meeting on how = to >>>>> better review and progress extensions to (non-TE) RSVP and = IntServ, >>>>> the transport area directors have formed a new RSVP directorate = and >>>>> given it these tasks: >>>>>=20 >>>>> * Review of all new work related to RSVP and Integrated Services = that >>>>> is proposed for IETF adoption. The purpose of this review is to >>>>> advise the ADs and the chairs of the Transport Area Working Group >>>>> (TSVWG) on whether a particular proposal should be taken on as a >>>>> work item. The directorate will continue to guide and review such >>>>> new work in TSVWG until it is ready for publication as an RFC. >>>>>=20 >>>>> * Review of selected documents during IETF last call or under IESG >>>>> review. The directorate monitors ongoing IETF work and should >>>>> independently decide when a document will benefit from their = review, >>>>> assign a reviewer and enter into a follow-on discussion with the >>>>> authors. When deemed necessary, the area directors will on = occasion >>>>> directly consult the directorate while forming their opinion on >>>>> selected documents being under review by the IESG. >>>>>=20 >>>>> * Cross-working group review. RSVP documents may have relevance to >>>>> several working groups, including TSVWG and MPLS-related groups >>>>> such as MPLS WG and CCAMP WG. The directorate will ensure that >>>>> drafts submitted to TSV WG are reviewed in the appropriate = MPLS-related >>>>> WGs if necessary, and will bring drafts from the MPLS-related WGs >>>>> to the attention of the TSV WG as appropriate. >>>>>=20 >>>>> The directorate can be reached at rsv-dir@ietf.org >>>>> . Additional information about the >>>>> directorate is at >>>>> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/tsv/trac/wiki/RSVP-Directorate. >>>>>=20 >>>>> Lars >>>>=20 >>>=20 >>> * >>> Francois Le Faucheur* >>> *Distinguished Engineer* >>> *Corporate Development* >>> flefauch@cisco.com >>> Phone: *+33 49 723 2619* >>> Mobile: *+33 6 19 98 50 90* >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> =09 >>>=20 >>> *Cisco Systems France* >>> Greenside >>> 400 Ave de Roumanille >>> 06410 Sophia Antipolis >>> France >>> Cisco.com >>>=20 >>> =09 >>>=20 >>> Think before you print. >>>=20 >>> This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the = sole >>> use of the intended recipient. Any review, use, distribution or >>> disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the = intended >>> recipient (or authorized to receive for the recipient), please = contact >>> the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message. >>>=20 >>> Cisco Systems France, Soci=E9t=E9 =E0 responsabiit=E9 limit=E9e, Rue = Camille >>> Desmoulins =96 Imm Atlantis Zac Forum Seine Ilot 7 92130 Issy les >>> Moulineaux, Au capital de 91.470 =80, 349 166 561 RCS Nanterre, = Directeur >>> de la publication: Jean-Luc Michel Givone. >>>=20 >>> For corporate legal information go to: >>> http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html >>>=20 >>>=20 >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> rsvp-dir mailing list >> rsvp-dir@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rsvp-dir >=20 > _______________________________________________ > rsvp-dir mailing list > rsvp-dir@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rsvp-dir --Apple-Mail-10--539050539 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252
Directorate,
 I don't = feel I can speak for the directorate at this point, as I have only heard = back from Bob Briscoe to date, and only with questions. For the record, = I am in favor of the WG adopting the 3 drafts that I asked you to look = at, but I'd like to hear from some more directorate = members.

Is anyone = there?

Bruce

My sincere apology!

I finally caught up all = the exchanges on this list on this train ride to Amsterdam.
I = also talked to someone (forgot the name) at IETF about these = drafts.
Unfortunately I was unable to make to the TSVWG = meeting due to conflict.
I am also in favor of the WG adopting = the 3 = drafts.

Lixia


=
From: Gorry Fairhurst = <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Date: July 27, 2010 = 9:45:39 AM EDT
To: Francois Le Faucheur <flefauch@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [rsvp-dir] = Update from RSVP directorate on RSVP Candidate = items?
Reply-To: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk

It would indeed be good to get a summary of feedback from = the rsvp directorate on these 2 drafts - please reply to tsv-ads and = tsvwg-chairs, if it is appropriate, please also feel free to copy the = tsvwg list.

My understanding is that this consultation is to = provide feedback for the ADs and Chairs. These inputs can help to = determine if there is sufficient interest and a need to adopt a draft. = The RSVP directorate are not enabled to make a decision on what drafts = are adopted.

If the directorate provide comments that support = progression it may be helpful to also suggest some document reviewers = who would commit to comment on the document both as it progresses = through the WG *and* in the WGLC.

Gorry

On 27/07/2010 = 15:26, Francois Le Faucheur wrote:
Hello = RSVP Directorate,

Any chance to = get an update from RSVP Directorate regarding = the
submitted RSVP candidate = items before TSVWG (Thur am)?

I believe the = submitted candidate items are:
*= RSVP Multi-TSPEC/Multi-PREEMPTION
* RSVP Flexible Resource = Sharing

Also, for = memory:
* the meaty part of = "draft-narayanan-tsvwg-rsvp-resource-sharing" = has
been merged into = "draft-berger-ccamp-assoc-info"
* so the latest version of = "draft-narayanan-tsvwg-rsvp-resource-sharing"
only contains a smaller optional delta on top = of
"draft-berger-ccamp-assoc-info"
* the CCAMP plan is that "draft-berger-ccamp-assoc-info" = be progressed
in = CCAMP
* I believe CCAMP is = also proposing to progress
"draft-narayanan-tsvwg-rsvp-resource-sharing" as a = companion document
(this = proposal does make sense to me since, again, the real meat is = in
"draft-berger-ccamp-assoc-info").

It would be = good to get views on this plan.

Thanks

Francois


On 10 May 2010, at 15:01, Lars = Eggert wrote:

Hi,

following the discussion during the IETF-77 TSVAREA = meeting on how to
better = review and progress extensions to (non-TE) RSVP and = IntServ,
the = transport area directors have formed a new RSVP directorate = and
given = it these tasks:

* = Review of all new work related to RSVP and Integrated Services = that
is = proposed for IETF adoption. The purpose of this review is = to
advise = the ADs and the chairs of the Transport Area Working = Group
(TSVWG) = on whether a particular proposal should be taken on as = a
work = item. The directorate will continue to guide and review = such
new = work in TSVWG until it is ready for publication as an = RFC.

* = Review of selected documents during IETF last call or under = IESG
review. = The directorate monitors ongoing IETF work and = should
independently decide when a document will benefit from = their review,
assign = a reviewer and enter into a follow-on discussion with = the
authors.= When deemed necessary, the area directors will on = occasion
directly= consult the directorate while forming their opinion = on
selected= documents being under review by the = IESG.

* = Cross-working group review. RSVP documents may have relevance = to
several = working groups, including TSVWG and MPLS-related = groups
such = as MPLS WG and CCAMP WG. The directorate will ensure = that
drafts = submitted to TSV WG are reviewed in the appropriate = MPLS-related
WGs if = necessary, and will bring drafts from the MPLS-related = WGs
to the = attention of the TSV WG as = appropriate.

The = directorate can be reached at rsv-dir@ietf.org
<mailto:rsv-dir@ietf.org>. = Additional information about = the
directorate is = at
ht= tp://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/tsv/trac/wiki/RSVP-Directorate.

Lars


*
Francois Le = Faucheur*
*Distinguished = Engineer*
*Corporate = Development*
flefauch@cisco.com <mailto:flefauch@cisco.com>
Phone: *+33 49 723 = 2619*
Mobile: *+33 6 19 98 50 = 90*


=

*Cisco Systems = France*
Greenside
400 = Ave de Roumanille
06410 Sophia = Antipolis
France
Cisco.com <http://www.cisco.com>

=

Think before = you print.

This email may = contain confidential and privileged material for the = sole
use of the intended = recipient. Any review, use, distribution or
disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are = not the intended
recipient (or = authorized to receive for the recipient), please = contact
the sender by reply = email and delete all copies of this message.

Cisco Systems = France, Soci=E9t=E9 =E0 responsabiit=E9 limit=E9e, Rue = Camille
Desmoulins =96 Imm = Atlantis Zac Forum Seine Ilot 7 92130 Issy = les
Moulineaux, Au capital de = 91.470 =80, 349 166 561 RCS Nanterre, = Directeur
de la publication: = Jean-Luc Michel Givone.

For corporate = legal information go to:
http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html



_______________________________________= ________
rsvp-dir mailing list
rsvp-dir@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.o= rg/mailman/listinfo/rsvp-dir

_______________________________________________
rsvp-dir mailing = list
rsvp-dir@ietf.org
https://www.iet= f.org/mailman/listinfo/rsvp-dir

= --Apple-Mail-10--539050539--