Subject: Re: Comments on draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-considerations-00

From: Thomas Morin <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2008 14:57:13 +0000

Hi Adrian,

Adrian Farrel :
>
> In view of the somewhat heated discussion, I think that it is critical to 
> get the title and Abstract of this draft right so that we have a good 
> context within which to review its content.
> 
> Can I float the changes below as a straw man to produce some text that will 
> get a bit more focus in the draft?

These changes look to me as very relevant.
Except if anybody disagrees, we will incorporate them in next revision.

We were planning to update the wording of the introduction to also
better encompass the content of the document, and we will propose new
text in next revision.

Thank you,

-Thomas

> ===
> OLD
> 
>      Considerations about Multicast for BGP/MPLS VPN Standardization
>                  draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-considerations-00
> 
> Abstract
> 
>    The current proposal for multicast in BGP/MPLS includes multiple
>    alternative mechanisms for some of the required building blocks of
>    the solution. The aim of this document is to leverage previously
>    documented requirements to identify the key elements and help move
>    forward solution design, toward the definition of a standard having a
>    well defined set of mandatory procedures.  The different proposed
>    alternative mechanisms are examined in the light of requirements
>    identified for multicast in L3VPNs, and suggestions are made about
>    which of these mechanisms standardization should favor.  Issues
>    related to existing deployments of early implementations are also
>    addressed.
> 
> ===
> NEW
> 
>       Mandatory Features in a Layer 3 Multicast BGP/MPLS VPN Solution
>                 draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-considerations-00
> 
> Abstract
> 
>    More that one set of mechanisms to support multicast in a layer 3
>    BGP/MPLS VPN has been defined. These are presented in the documents
>    that define them as optional building blocks.
> 
>    To enable interoperability between implementations, this document
>    defines a subset of features that is considered mandatory for a
>    multicast BGP/MPLS VPN implementation. This will help implementers
>    and deployers understand which L3VPN multicast requirements are best
>    satisfied by each option.
> ===
>

---

From: Thomas Morin <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2008 15:15:32 +0100

Hi, 

I've just posted a respin of draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-considerations
including Adrian proposal below, a rewrite of intro and conclusion, and
fixing a few typos/minor updates.

We'll try to keep such a release-early/release-often cycle for next
updates, and will update the draft following the discussion on the list
as much as possible.

Thank you,

-Thomas