Andrew,
I like that improvement. Thanks, Alia On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 9:06 PM, Dolganow, Andrew (Nokia - SG/Singapore) < andrew.dolga...@nokia.com> wrote: > One comment – I would add a bit of text at the end of the below-quoted > sentence to ensure that “extensions planned to meet the needs” do not > create stability/performance problems to IGPs. I proposed a text in red for > that: > > > > The Link-State Routing (LSR) Working Group will coordinate with other > working groups, such as RTGWG, SPRING, MPLS, TEAS, V6OPS, and 6MAN, to > understand the need for extensions and to confirm that the planned work > meets the needs and is compatible with both IS-IS and OSPF from > functional, architectural and performance point of views > > > > Andrew > > > > *From: *Isis-wg <isis-wg-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of Alia Atlas < > akat...@gmail.com> > *Date: *Thursday, January 25, 2018 at 1:19 AM > *To: *"isis...@ietf.org" <isis...@ietf.org>, OSPF List <ospf@ietf.org> > *Subject: *[Isis-wg] Link-State Routing WG charter > > > > Here is the proposed charter for the LSR working group > > that will be created from the SPF and ISIS working groups. > > > > This is scheduled for internal review for the IESG telechat on February 8. > > > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-lsr/ > > > > The Link-State Routing (LSR) Working Group is chartered to document > current protocol implementation practices and improvements, protocol usage > scenarios, maintenance and extensions of link-state routing interior > gateway protocols (IGPs) with a focus on IS-IS, OSPFv2, and OSPFv3. The > LSR Working Group is formed by merging the isis and ospf WGs and will take > on all their existing adopted work at the time of chartering. > > > > IS-IS is an IGP specified and standardized by ISO through ISO 10589:2002 > and additional RFC standards with extensions to support IP that has been > deployed in the Internet for decades. For the IS-IS protocol, LSR’s work > is focused on IP routing, currently based on the agreement in RFC 3563 with > ISO/JTC1/SC6. The LSR WG will interact with other standards bodies that > have responsible for standardizing IS-IS. > > > > OSPFv2 [RFC 2328 and extensions], is an IGP that has been deployed in the > Internet for decades. OSPFv3 [RFC5340 and extensions] provides OSPF for > IPv6 and IPv4 [RFC5838] which can be delivered over IPv6 or IPv4 [RFC 7949]. > > > > The LSR Working Group will generally manage its specific work items by > milestones agreed with the responsible Area Director. > > > > The following topics are expected to be an initial focus: > > > > 1) Improving OSPF support for IPv6 and extensions using OSPFv3 LSA > Extendibility. > > 2) Extensions needed for Segment Routing and associated architectural > changes > > 3) YANG models for IS-IS, OSPFv2, and OSPFv3 and extensions > > 4) Extensions for source-destination routing [draft-ietf-rtgwg-dst-src- > routing] > > 5) Potentially, extensions to better support specific network topologies > such as > > ones commonly used in data centers. > > > > The Link-State Routing (LSR) Working Group will coordinate with other > working groups, such as RTGWG, SPRING, MPLS, TEAS, V6OPS, and 6MAN, to > understand the need for extensions and to confirm that the planned work > meets the needs. LSR can coordinate with CCAMP and BIER on their > extensions to the LSR IGPs as useful. LSR may coordinate with other WGs as > needed. > > > > Regards, > > Alia >
_______________________________________________ OSPF mailing list OSPF@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
