The IESG has approved the following document: - 'Generic Connection Admission Control (GCAC) Algorithm Specification for IP/MPLS Networks' (draft-ash-gcac-algorithm-spec-04.txt) as an Experimental RFC This document has been reviewed in the IETF but is not the product of an IETF Working Group. The IESG contact person is Adrian Farrel. A URL of this Internet Draft is: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ash-gcac-algorithm-spec/ Technical Summary This document presents a generic connection admission control (GCAC) reference model and algorithm for IP/MPLS-based networks. Service provider (SP) IP/MPLS networks need an MPLS GCAC mechanism, for example, to reject voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) calls when additional calls would adversely affect calls already in progress. Working Group Summary This document is being advanced as AD Sponsored. This document was raised on the MPLS list but attracted no attention despite pleas from the authors for review and comment. The document is relevant to the WG, but is not disruptive to existing deployments nor competitive with existing or planned working group work. There is no specific MPLS charter item to cover this I-D, because the level of interest in the working group (as gauged by mailing-list discussion) was minimal, and because this is not a protocol specification (it is an experimental algortihm) the MPLS chairs and AD agree that this does not need to be run through the working group. Nevertheless, this is being progressed as an IETF document because of its strong relevance to the MPLS working group. The IETF last call was specifically notified to the MPLS and CCAMP working groups to encourage comments from that specific community. Document Quality This document is experimental. The objective is to place the algorithm in public view and encourage experimentation. Personnel Young Lee (leeyoung@huawei.com) is the Document Shepherd Adrian Farrel (adrian@olddog.co.uk) is the Responsible AD RFC Editor Note Section 4 paragraph 2 bullet list ADD to the end of the list - [RFC5069] identifies a number of security threats against emergency call marking and mapping. Section 6 of [RFC5069] lists security requirements to counter these threats, and those requirements should be followed by implementaitons of this document. - The security requirements listed in Section 11 of [RFC4412] should be followed. These requirements apply to use of the Communications Resource Priority Header for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP), and concern aspects of authentication and aurthorization, confidentiality and privacy requirements, protection against denial-of-service attacks, and anonymity. END --- Section 6 ADD at end of section. Finally, Robert Sparks' thorough review and helpful suggestions are sincerely appreciated. END --- Section 8 Add new references in the correct order ADD [RFC4412] Schulzrinne, H., Polk, J., "Communications Resource Priority for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)", RFC 4412, February 2006. [RFC5069] Taylor, T., et al., "Security Threats and Requirements for Emergency Call Marking and Mapping", RFC 5069, January 2008. END _______________________________________________ IETF-Announce mailing list IETF-Announce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
