Subject: L3VPN WG Status/Action Register

From: Danny McPherson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 10:27:39 -0600

Team,
A few of you have nudged Marshall and I over the past
couple weeks, either about drafts that have finished some
form of call for feedback, or the lack of queries to the
mailing list for accepting other documents, or precisely how
to phrase questions related to tough MVPN issues, or some
mix of the above.

Given the wrap-up of the Dublin meeting at the beginning
of August, and the perception that a heavy IETF work hiatus
occurs cyclicly during the month of August, well, by request
of both the ADs, and many within the WG, we've decided to
extend current calls for feedback until SEP 12.  We're also
figuring out just how to approach the MVPN issues, working
to determine what will be plausible to progress within the IETF
framework and the IESG will support, with constant consult
from the relative ADs.

That said, just as a reminder we're on top of this, here's the
list of the outstanding calls to the list, and if you have opinions
that you have not shared already you should go back to the
archives (or revisit your l3vpn unread message list) and comment
appropriately.

---
Call for adoption as WG document:

o draft-mnapierala-mvpn-part-reqt-02
o draft-pmohapat-l3vpn-acceptown-community-00
o draft-pillay-esnault-moyer-ospfv3-pece-00
o *draft-rekhter-v6-ext-communities-02
o *draft-rekhter-as4octet-ext-community-03

* Some concerns about why not IDR, will discuss with
relevant ADs and WG chairs.

---
Call to kill this document:

o draft-ietf-l3vpn-ipsec-2547

---
Action forthcoming:

o Clarify any charter issues with "profiles"
o Call to adopt draft-morin- as WG item
o Proposal for progress path for MVPN - questions, etc..

---
If you have concerns about anything discussed above, or any
documents or items that may be missing, please email Marshall
and I ASAP.

Thanks!

-danny & Marshall

---

From: "Drake, John E" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 09:48:59 -0700

>o draft-mnapierala-mvpn-part-reqt-02

No

>o draft-pmohapat-l3vpn-acceptown-community-00

Yes

>o draft-pillay-esnault-moyer-ospfv3-pece-00

Yes

>o *draft-rekhter-v6-ext-communities-02

Yes

>o *draft-rekhter-as4octet-ext-community-03

Yes

---

From: "Andrew G. Malis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 13:15:41 -0400

Danny,

Regarding draft-ietf-l3vpn-ipsec-2547, while I can understand the
motivation, in the absence of deployments I certainly wouldn't mind to
see it killed as an unneccessary distraction for the WG and an
unnecessary option in vendor equipment. But if there are operational
deployments, then I see the usefulness of having an RFC to allow
multivendor interoperability.

Cheers,
Andy

---

From: Marshall Eubanks <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 13:51:27 -0400

Dear Andy;

On Sep 4, 2008, at 1:15 PM, Andrew G. Malis wrote:

> deployments,

We are not aware of any deployments of this draft. If anyone knows  
differently, now
would be a good time to speak up.

Regards
Marshall

> then I see the usefulness of having an RFC to allow

---

From: Danny McPherson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 13:11:00 -0600

> would be a good time to speak up.

Even implementations, or people willing to work on editing
the draft, much less deployments.

-danny