Subject: Re-Charter discussion

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2010 21:04:54 +0100

Colleagues,

For the past two IETFs we have discussed re-chartering and what, if anything
we should change in the current charter text.

In Anaheim there was rough consensus to make some changes to the charter to
remove items the WG is no longer working on (e.g. Virtual Router based VPNs)
and reflect that the work of the group includes extending existing solutions
without having text that unnecessarily restricts the scope of the work we
undertake.

I have included below proposed text for a modified charter which I hope
accurately reflects the consensus of the WG from IETF 77.

Please review the proposed charter text and provide any comments or
suggestions for alternative text.

For your convenience I have put a diff between the existing charter text and
the proposed charter text here:

http://www.niven-jenkins.co.uk/L3VPN/L3VPN-Charter-Diff-00.html

The proposed charter text is below ad also available here:
http://www.niven-jenkins.co.uk/L3VPN/New-L3VPN-Charter-00.txt

NEW CHARTER TEXT:
Description of Working Group
 
This working group is responsible for defining, specifying and extending
BGP/MPLS IP VPNs solutions (based on RFC4364) for supporting
provider-provisioned Layer-3 (routed) Virtual Private Networks (L3VPNs).
 
The WG will extend RFC4364 based solutions to address deployment of the
following features in a VPN environment:
1. IP Multicast
2. IPv6
 
The following VPN deployment scenarios will be considered by the WG:
1. Internet-wide: VPN sites attached to arbitrary points in the Internet.
2. Single service provider (SP)/single AS: VPN sites attached to the network
of a single provider within the scope of a single AS.
3. Single SP/multiple AS'es: VPN sites attached to the network of a single
provider consisting of multiple AS'es.
4. Cooperating SPs: VPN sites attached to networks of different providers
that cooperate with each other to provide VPN service.
 
As part of this effort the WG will work on the following tasks (additional
work items will require rechartering):
1. Additional requirements and framework for Layer 3 VPNs.
2. Solution documents, including applicability statements, for each approach
listed above.
3. MIB definitions for each approach.
4. Security mechanisms for each approach.
 
As a general rule, the WG will not create new protocols, but will provide
functional requirements for extensions of the existing protocols that will
be discussed in the protocol-specific WGs. L3VPN WG will review proposed
protocol extensions for L3VPNs before they are recommended to appropriate
protocol-specific WGs.
 
As stated above, the WG will define an IPv6 over BGP / MPLS VPN solution.
This will include a forwarding plane component and a control plane
component. In the forwarding plane, IPv6 datagrams will be encapsulated
within an MPLS header. If any aspect of IPv6 forwarding over MPLS is as yet
undefined, the L3VPN WG will defer to the MPLS and appropriate IPv6 WGs. On
the control plane, BGP extensions may also need to be defined. In this
respect, the L3VPN WG will defer to the IDR and appropriate IPv6 WGs.
 
As stated above, the WG will define a multicast over BGP / MPLS VPN
solution. This will include a forwarding plane component and a control plane
component. In the forwarding plane, IP multicast datagrams will be
encapsulated within an MPLS header. If any aspect of IP multicast forwarding
over MPLS is as yet undefined, the L3VPN WG will defer to the MPLS and
appropriate multicast WGs. On the control plane, BGP extensions may also
need to be defined. In this respect, the L3VPN WG will defer to the IDR and
appropriate multicast WGs.
 
QoS support is excluded from the charter at this time. It may be considered
for inclusion in an updated charter at a later time.

Thanks
Ben