I agree. Historic seems go be the way to go with this document.

Sent from my iPad

On Sep 13, 2011, at 3:16 PM, Luca Martini <lmart...@cisco.com> wrote:

> On 09/13/11 10:03, Alexander Vainshtein wrote:
>> Luca, and all,
>> 
>> I concur with Andy's opinion that the reference to RFC 4447 must become 
>> Normative (this will not delay the publication is  too often the case:-).
>> 
>> As for Informational vs. Historical, I think that Informational is more 
>> appropriate because, AFAIK, the technique defined in draft-kompella is not 
>> just a documenting an existing solution - it describes is THE ONLY deployed 
>> solution for the problem. (If this statement happens to be factually 
>> incorrect, I would be happy to learn about the deployed alternatives.)
> no, there are several ( I think 3 ) implementations of the
> l2vpn-singalling standards track document also known as rfc6074.
> There are several deployments of rfc6074.
> 
> As 10 years ago we had several deployments of "draft-martini" which over
> time are being updated to rfc4447 , there are some deployments of the
> solution described in the draft-kompella-l2vpn-l2vpn-07.txt. I still
> think that an historical RFC would fit this solution , unless we plan on
> expanding it , and pursuing new enhancements to it.
> 
> Luca
> 
> 
>> Regards,
>>     Sasha
>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: l2vpn-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:l2vpn-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of 
>>> Luca
>>> Martini
>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 6:24 PM
>>> To: Andrew G. Malis
>>> Cc: l2...@ietf.org; pwe3; IETF Discussion
>>> Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-kompella-l2vpn-l2vpn-07.txt> (Layer 2 Virtual
>>> Private Networks Using BGP for Auto-discovery and Signaling) to 
>>> Informational
>>> RFC
>>> 
>>> I concurr with Andy.
>>> Given that the  WG has made a decision on which control plane technology
>>> is the standard track technology we should have a statement in this
>>> document pointing to the standard track rfc4447 so it is clear to anyone
>>> reading the document.
>>> In the same way we published the draft-martini documents as historical
>>> ee should publish this document as historical rfc, to document existing
>>> implementations.
>>> 
>>> Luca
>>> 
>>> On 09/01/11 05:42, Andrew G. Malis wrote:
>>>> Speaking as an individual, the solution in this draft has been has
>>>> been operationally deployed in a number of service provider networks,
>>>> and it should be documented in an informational RFC.
>>>> 
>>>> Speaking as PWE3 co-chair, I would be happier if this draft required
>>>> that routers that implement this solution also implement RFC 4447,
>>>> that RFC 4447 be configured as the default mechanism for pseudowire
>>>> signaling, and that RFC 4447 was moved from an informational to a
>>>> normative reference. In practice, I know that routers that implement
>>>> this also do implement RFC 4447, but I would like to see it in the RFC
>>>> as well.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Andy
>>>> 
>>>>    Subject:    Last Call: (Layer 2 Virtual Private Networks Using BGP
>>>>    for Auto-discovery and Signaling) to Informational RFC
>>>>    Date:    Tue, 30 Aug 2011 10:50:05 -0700
>>>>    From:    The IESG <iesg-secret...@ietf.org>
>>>>    <mailto:iesg-secret...@ietf.org>
>>>>    Reply-To:    ietf@ietf.org <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
>>>>    To:    IETF-Announce <ietf-annou...@ietf.org>
>>>>    <mailto:ietf-annou...@ietf.org>
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>    The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider
>>>>    the following document:
>>>>    - 'Layer 2 Virtual Private Networks Using BGP for Auto-discovery and
>>>>       Signaling'
>>>>      <draft-kompella-l2vpn-l2vpn-07.txt> as an Informational RFC
>>>> 
>>>>    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@ietf.org <mailto:ietf@ietf.org> mailing lists by 2011-09-27.
>>> Exceptionally, comments may be
>>>>    sent to i...@ietf.org <mailto:i...@ietf.org> instead. In either case,
>>> please retain the
>>>>    beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
>>>> 
>>>>    Abstract
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>       Layer 2 Virtual Private Networks (L2VPNs) based on Frame Relay or ATM
>>>>       circuits have been around a long time; more recently, Ethernet VPNs,
>>>>       including Virtual Private LAN Service, have become popular.
>>>>       Traditional L2VPNs often required a separate Service Provider
>>>>       infrastructure for each type, and yet another for the Internet and IP
>>>>       VPNs.  In addition, L2VPN provisioning was cumbersome.  This document
>>>>       presents a new approach to the problem of offering L2VPN services
>>>>       where the L2VPN customer's experience is virtually identical to that
>>>>       offered by traditional Layer 2 VPNs, but such that a Service Provider
>>>>       can maintain a single network for L2VPNs, IP VPNs and the Internet,
>>>>       as well as a common provisioning methodology for all services.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>    The file can be obtained via
>>>>    http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-kompella-l2vpn-l2vpn/
>>>> 
>>>>    IESG discussion can be tracked via
>>>>    http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-kompella-l2vpn-l2vpn/
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>    The following IPR Declarations may be related to this I-D:
>>>> 
>>>>       http://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1149/
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>    _______________________________________________
>>>>    IETF-Announce mailing list
>>>>    ietf-annou...@ietf.org <mailto:ietf-annou...@ietf.org>
>>>>    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Ietf mailing list
>>>> Ietf@ietf.org
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
>> 
>> 
>> This e-mail message is intended for the recipient only and contains 
>> information which is CONFIDENTIAL and which may be proprietary to ECI 
>> Telecom. If you have received this transmission in error, please inform us 
>> by e-mail, phone or fax, and then delete the original and all copies thereof.
>> 
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
> 
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Reply via email to