To clarify
The text that needs to be reviewed is the text in the RFC editor's queue
http://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc6478.txt
Note that the URL for the text in the RFC Editor's queue, provided
in the original email, contains a spurious trailing space.
Stewart
On 16/04/2012 17:33, The IESG wrote:
Due to technical changes made during AUTH48, the IESG is issuing an
additional Last Call on the following document:
- 'Pseudowire Status for Static Pseudowires'
<draft-ietf-pwe3-static-pw-status-10.txt> as a Proposed Standard
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
ietf@xxxxxxxx mailing lists by 2012-04-30. Exceptionally, comments may be
sent to iesg@xxxxxxxx instead. In either case, please retain the
beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
Abstract
This document specifies a mechanism to signal Pseudowire (PW) status
messages using an PW associated channel (ACh). Such a mechanism is
suitable for use where no PW dynamic control plane exits, known as
static PWs, or where a Terminating Provider Edge (T-PE) needs to send
a PW status message directly to a far end T-PE. The mechanism allows
PW OAM message mapping and PW redundancy to operate on static PWs.
This document also updates rfc5885 in the case when Bi-directional
Forwarding Detection (BFD) is used to convey PW status signaling
information.
The file can be obtained via
http://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc6478.txt/
IESG discussion can be tracked via
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pwe3-static-pw-status/ballot/
No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
--
For corporate legal information go to:
http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html