RE: WG Action: Rechartered Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (bfd)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Tom,

I hear you.
The BFD chairs are working with me on this and we expect (well I demand ;-) to
have new milestones out within 7 days.

Adrian

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of t.p.
> Sent: 08 November 2012 14:56
> To: afarrel@xxxxxxxxxxx; ietf@xxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: WG Action: Rechartered Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (bfd)
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Adrian Farrel" <afarrel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "'t.p.'" <daedulus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <ietf@xxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2012 5:43 PM
> > Hello Tom.
> >
> > Charter text is distinct from milestones.
> > The charter is discussed by IESG and put out for community review.
> > Milestones are set by the chairs in discussion with their AD.
> > The process for handling the updates is also different.
> >
> > The BFD chairs agreed with me that they would update the milestones
> once the new
> > charter text was posted, so I hope we'll see that "soon".
> 
> Understood, but be aware of the impact it has, at least on me.  I was
> glad to see that one item, which I expect to engage with, was still in
> the Charter and then looked below to see when I might want to set aside
> time for it, only to see all those dates in the past, reminiscent of all
> those failed project plans that I have seen over the years.  If the
> dates are not updated, then I would think it a better process to send
> out just the updated Charter, without any dates.
> 
> Tom Petch
> 
> > Cheers,
> > Adrian
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf
> Of t.p.
> > > Sent: 01 November 2012 09:28
> > > To: ietf@xxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: Re: WG Action: Rechartered Bidirectional Forwarding
> Detection (bfd)
> > >
> > > I realise that the timekeeping of the IETF is not on a par with its
> > > engineering, but it seems a shame to promulgate a new charter for
> which
> > > every milestone is already several months in arrears.
> > >
> > > Tom Petch
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "The IESG" <iesg-secretary@xxxxxxxx>
> > > To: "IETF-Announce" <ietf-announce@xxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: "bfd WG" <rtg-bfd@xxxxxxxx>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2012 3:46 PM
> > >
> > > > The Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (bfd) working group in the
> > > Routing
> > > > Area of the IETF has been rechartered. For additional information
> > > please
> > > > contact the Area Directors or the WG Chairs.
> > > >
> > > > Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (bfd)
> > > > ------------------------------------------------
> > > > Current Status: Active Working Group
> > > >
> > > > Chairs:
> > > >   David Ward <dward@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > >   Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@xxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > Technical advisors:
> > > >   Dave Katz <dkatz@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > Assigned Area Director:
> > > >   Adrian Farrel <adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > Mailing list
> > > >   Address: rtg-bfd@xxxxxxxx
> > > >   To Subscribe: rtg-bfd-request@xxxxxxxx
> > > >   Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtg-bfd/
> > > >
> > > > Charter of Working Group:
> > > >
> > > > The BFD Working Group is chartered to standardize and support the
> > > > bidirectional forwarding detection protocol (BFD) and its
> extensions.
> > > A
> > > > core goal of the working group is to standardize BFD in the
> context of
> > > IP
> > > > routing, or protocols such as MPLS that are based on IP routing,
> in a
> > > way
> > > > that will encourage multiple, inter-operable vendor
> implementations.
> > > The
> > > > Working Group will also provide advice and guidance on BFD to
> other
> > > > working groups or standards bodies as requested.
> > > >
> > > > BFD is a protocol intended to detect faults in the bidirectional
> path
> > > > between two forwarding engines, including physical interfaces,
> > > > subinterfaces, data link(s), and to the extent possible the
> forwarding
> > > > engines themselves, with potentially very low latency. It operates
> > > > independently of media, data protocols, and routing protocols. An
> > > > additional goal is to provide a single mechanism that can be used
> for
> > > > liveness detection over any media, at any protocol layer, with
> > > > a wide range of detection times and overhead, to avoid a
> proliferation
> > > > of different methods.
> > > >
> > > > Important characteristics of BFD include:
> > > >
> > > > - Simple, fixed-field encoding to facilitate implementations in
> > > hardware.
> > > >
> > > > - Independence of the data protocol being forwarded between two
> > > systems.
> > > >   BFD packets are carried as the payload of whatever encapsulating
> > > >   protocol is appropriate for the medium and network.
> > > >
> > > > - Path independence: BFD can provide failure detection on any kind
> of
> > > >   path between systems, including direct physical links, virtual
> > > circuits,
> > > >   tunnels, MPLS LSPs, multihop routed paths, and unidirectional
> links
> > > (so
> > > >   long as there is some return path, of course).
> > > >
> > > > - Ability to be bootstrapped by any other protocol that
> automatically
> > > >   forms peer, neighbor or adjacency relationships to seed BFD
> endpoint
> > > >   discovery.
> > > >
> > > > The working group is chartered to complete the following work
> items:
> > > >
> > > > 1. Develop the MIB module for BFD and submit it to the IESG for
> > > > publication as a Proposed Standard.
> > > >
> > > > 2a. Provide a generic keying-based cryptographic authentication
> > > mechanism
> > > > for the BFD protocol in discussion with the KARP working group.
> This
> > > > mechanism will support authentication through a key identifier for
> the
> > > BFD
> > > > session's Security Association rather than specifying new
> > > authentication
> > > > extensions.
> > > >
> > > > 2b. Provide extensions to the BFD MIB in support of the generic
> > > > keying-based cryptographic authentication mechanism.
> > > >
> > > > 2c. Specify cryptographic authentication procedures for the BFD
> > > protocol
> > > > using HMAC-SHA-256 (possibly truncated to a smaller integrity
> check
> > > > value) using the generic keying-based cryptographic authentication
> > > mechanism.
> > > >
> > > > 3. Provide an extension to the BFD core protocol in support of
> > > point-to-
> > > > multipoint links and networks.
> > > >
> > > > 4. Assist the MPLS working group in the standardization of the BFD
> > > > protocol for MPLS-TP.  The preferred solution will be
> interoperable
> > > with the
> > > > current BFD specification.
> > > >
> > > > 5. Provide one or more mechanisms to run BFD over Link Aggregation
> > > Group
> > > > Interfaces.
> > > >
> > > > The working group will maintain a relationship with the KARP and
> MPLS
> > > > working groups, and will communicate with the IEEE with respect to
> BFD
> > > > over LAGs.
> > > >
> > > > Milestones:
> > > >   Done     - Submit the base protocol specification to the IESG to
> be
> > > > considered as a Proposed Standard
> > > >   Done     - Submit BFD encapsulation and usage profile for
> single-hop
> > > > IPv4 and IPv6 adjacencies to the IESG to be considered as a
> Proposed
> > > > Standard
> > > >   Done     - Submit BFD encapsulation and usage profile for MPLS
> LSPs
> > > to
> > > > the IESG to be considered as a Proposed Standard
> > > >   Done     - Submit BFD encapsulation and usage profile for
> multi-hop
> > > > IPv4 and IPv6 adjacencies to the IESG to be considered as a
> Proposed
> > > > Standard
> > > >   Sep 2011 - Submit the BFD MIB to the IESG to be considered as a
> > > > Proposed Standard
> > > >   Dec 2011 - Submit the generic keying based cryptographic
> > > authentication
> > > > mechanism to the IESG to be considered as a Proposed Standard
> > > >   Dec 2011 - Submit a BFD MIB extension in support of the generic
> > > keying
> > > > document to the IESG to be considered as a Proposed Standard
> > > >   Dec 2011 - Submit the cryptographic authentication procedures
> for
> > > BFD
> > > > to the IESG to be considered as a Proposed Standard
> > > >   Mar 2012 - Submit the the document on BFD point-to-multipoint
> > > support
> > > > to the IESG to be considered as a Proposed Standard
> > > >   Jun 2012 - Submit the bootstrapping mechanism for BFD using DHCP
> to
> > > the
> > > > IESG to be considered as a Proposed Standard




[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]