From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Thu Jun 5 21:14:57 2003
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged))
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA24342
for ; Thu, 5 Jun 2003 21:14:57 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h561EVd28206
for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 5 Jun 2003 21:14:31 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h561EUB28203
for ; Thu, 5 Jun 2003 21:14:30 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA24309
for ; Thu, 5 Jun 2003 21:14:27 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19O5mU-00058C-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 05 Jun 2003 21:12:34 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19O5mU-000588-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 05 Jun 2003 21:12:34 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h561E8B28178;
Thu, 5 Jun 2003 21:14:08 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h561DIB28152
for ; Thu, 5 Jun 2003 21:13:18 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA24272
for ; Thu, 5 Jun 2003 21:13:15 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19O5lK-00057U-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Thu, 05 Jun 2003 21:11:22 -0400
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] ident=mailnull)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19O5lJ-00057Q-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Thu, 05 Jun 2003 21:11:22 -0400
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] helo=127.0.0.1)
by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1)
id 19O5n8-0002xr-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 01:13:14 +0000
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2003 18:12:57 -0700
From: Alex Zinin
X-Mailer: The Bat! (v1.62i) Personal
Reply-To: Alex Zinin
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Message-ID: <1171117877923.20030605181257@psg.com>
To: l2vpn@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Draft charter for L2VPN - IPLS & ARP Mediation
In-Reply-To:
References:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Id:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Folks-
OK, not much additional support on the list, but my overall
impression based on what we saw here previously and my off-line
conversations is that we should put these two topics in the charter
(with the caveat that IP-only interworking will be addressed after
the basic mechanisms) and shut the door for now.
Stay tuned, I'll be sending the updated charter tonight.
Alex
From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Thu Jun 5 21:31:48 2003
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged))
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA24572
for ; Thu, 5 Jun 2003 21:31:48 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h561VLW28642
for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 5 Jun 2003 21:31:21 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h561VLB28639
for ; Thu, 5 Jun 2003 21:31:21 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA24562
for ; Thu, 5 Jun 2003 21:31:17 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19O62n-0005BU-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 05 Jun 2003 21:29:25 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19O62m-0005BR-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 05 Jun 2003 21:29:24 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h561V3B28626;
Thu, 5 Jun 2003 21:31:03 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h561UiB28582
for ; Thu, 5 Jun 2003 21:30:44 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA24533
for ; Thu, 5 Jun 2003 21:30:40 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19O62B-0005BI-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Thu, 05 Jun 2003 21:28:47 -0400
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] ident=mailnull)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19O62B-0005BF-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Thu, 05 Jun 2003 21:28:47 -0400
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] helo=127.0.0.1)
by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1)
id 19O63z-0003lx-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 01:30:39 +0000
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2003 18:30:22 -0700
From: Alex Zinin
X-Mailer: The Bat! (v1.62i) Personal
Reply-To: Alex Zinin
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Message-ID: <281118922835.20030605183022@psg.com>
To: l2vpn@ietf.org
Subject: Updated L2VPN WG charter
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Id:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Folks-
Below is the updated charter for your review. The diff can
be found at:
http://psg.com/~zinin/ietf/ppvpn/l2vpn-diff-00-01.html
The milestones are rather sketchy and may need some more
adjustment.
--
Alex
Layer 2 Virtual Private Networks (l2vpn)
Chairs:
Area Director(s):
Thomas Narten
Erik Nordmark
Area Advisor:
Thomas Narten
Technical Advisor:
Alex Zinin
Description of Working Group:
This working group is responsible for defining and specifying a
limited number of solutions for supporting provider-provisioned
layer-2 virtual private networks (L2VPNs).
The WG is responsible for standardization of the following solutions:
1. Virtual Private LAN Service--L2 service that emulates LAN
across an IP and an MPLS-enabled IP network, allowing standard
Ethernet devices communicate with each other as if they were
connected to a common LAN segment.
2. Virtual Private Wire Service--L2 service that provides L2
point-to-point connectivity (e.g. Frame Relay DLCI, ATM VPI/VCI,
point-to-point Ethernet) across an IP and an MPLS-enabled IP network.
3. IP-only L2 VPNs--L2 service across an IP and an MPLS-enabled
IP network, allowing standard IP devices to communicate with each
other as if they were connected to a common LAN segment or a point-
to-point circuit.
The WG will address intra-AS scenarios only at this point (other
scenarios will be considered for inclusion in the updated charter when
the current one is completed.)
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.
The group will review proposed protocol extensions for L2VPNs before
they are recommended to appropriate protocol-specific WGs.
As a specific example, this WG will not define new encapsulation
mechanism, but will use those defined in the PWE3 WG.
The WG will work on the following items. Adding new work items
will require rechartering.
1. Discovery of PEs participating in L2 service, and
topology of required connectivity
2. Signaling of pseudo-wire and service parameters
3. Solution documents (providing the framework for a specific
solution, should include info on how discovery, signaling,
and encaps work together, include security, AS as a separate
document)
4. MIBs
5. L2VPN-specific OAM extensions--extensions to existing OAM
solutions for VPLS and VPWS.
6. Interworking of IP devices connected to an IP-only L2 VPN using
dissimilar attachment circuits. This topic will be explored only
after the basic L2VPN services (VPWS, VPLS, and IP L2VPN) are
defined.
Where necessary, the WG will coordinate its activities with IEEE 802.1
Milestones (optimistic):
JUL 2003 Submit L2 requirements to IESG for publication as Informational RFC
JUL 2003 Submit L2 framework to IESG for publication as Informational RFC
JUL 2003 Identify VPLS and VPWS solutions for the WG
AUG 2003 Submit an I-D describing MIB for VPLS
AUG 2003 Submit an I-D describing MIB for VPWS
AUG 2003 Submit an I-D on OAM for VPLS
AUG 2003 Submit an I-D on OAM for VPWS
DEC 2003 Submit VPLS solution documents to IESG
DEC 2003 Submit VPWS solution documents to IESG
JAN 2004 Submit IP VPN solution documents to IESG
FEB 2004 Submit MIB for VPLS to IESG
FEB 2004 Submit MIB for VPWS to IESG
MAR 2004 Submit OAM for VPLS to IESG
MAR 2004 Submit OAM for VPWS to IESG
From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Fri Jun 6 10:19:54 2003
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged))
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA25679
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 10:19:54 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h56EJTb27436
for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 10:19:29 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56EJTB27433
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 10:19:29 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA25663
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 10:19:23 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OI26-0002Uc-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 10:17:30 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OI26-0002UZ-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 10:17:30 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56EJ7B27402;
Fri, 6 Jun 2003 10:19:07 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56EILB27356
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 10:18:21 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA25614
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 10:18:15 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OI10-0002U4-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 10:16:22 -0400
Received: from kanfw1.ottawa.alcatel.ca ([192.75.23.69] helo=kanmx1.ca.alcatel.com)
by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OI0z-0002U1-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 10:16:21 -0400
Received: (qmail 5156 invoked from network); 6 Jun 2003 14:27:53 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO camail03.ca.alcatel.com) (138.120.105.217)
by kanmx1.ca.alcatel.com with SMTP; 6 Jun 2003 14:27:53 -0000
Received: from alcatel.com ([138.120.250.31]) by
camail03.ca.alcatel.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with
ESMTP id HG2D2E00.OBJ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 10:18:14 -0400
Message-ID: <3EE0A294.E6E43838@alcatel.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2003 10:17:56 -0400
From: "Cheng-Yin Lee"
Reply-To: Cheng-Yin.Lee@alcatel.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Alex Zinin
CC: l2vpn@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Draft charter for L2VPN - IPLS & ARP Mediation
References: <1171117877923.20030605181257@psg.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Id:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Alex,
Similar to emulated LAN service (that you have defined in the L2VPN
charter), I think it would be useful to define the service (the problem
being solved) being specified here instead of stating the solution
(IPLS).
Thanks
Cheng-Yin
Alex Zinin wrote:
>
> Folks-
>
> OK, not much additional support on the list, but my overall
> impression based on what we saw here previously and my off-line
> conversations is that we should put these two topics in the charter
> (with the caveat that IP-only interworking will be addressed after
> the basic mechanisms) and shut the door for now.
>
> Stay tuned, I'll be sending the updated charter tonight.
>
> Alex
From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Fri Jun 6 11:37:00 2003
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged))
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA28802
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 11:36:59 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h56FaWO01497
for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 11:36:32 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56FaWB01494
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 11:36:32 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA28798
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 11:36:29 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OJEj-0003Bj-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 11:34:37 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OJEi-0003Bg-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 11:34:36 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56Fa7B01472;
Fri, 6 Jun 2003 11:36:07 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56FZAB01431
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 11:35:10 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA28771
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 11:35:07 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OJDO-0003BE-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 11:33:14 -0400
Received: from zcars0m9.nortelnetworks.com ([47.129.242.157])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OJDO-0003BA-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 11:33:14 -0400
Received: from zcard309.ca.nortel.com (zcard309.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.69])
by zcars0m9.nortelnetworks.com (Switch-2.2.6/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id h56FYTl29831;
Fri, 6 Jun 2003 11:34:30 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by zcard309.ca.nortel.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
id ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 11:34:30 -0400
Message-ID:
From: "Hamid Ould-Brahim"
To: Alex Zinin , l2vpn@ietf.org
Subject: RE: Updated L2VPN WG charter
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 11:34:28 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C32C41.1E3C19DC"
Sender: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Id:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C32C41.1E3C19DC
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Alex,
[clipped]...
>
> 2. Signaling of pseudo-wire and service parameters
>
I think it should be:
"2. Signaling for the purpose of establishing l2vpns"
or along these lines...
Signaling of pseudo-wire is already covered in PWE3
(for PW setup and maintenance)...
Hamid.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C32C41.1E3C19DC
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Alex,
[clipped]...
>
> 2. Signaling of
pseudo-wire and service parameters
>
I think it should
be:
"2. Signaling for the purpose of
establishing l2vpns"
or along these lines...
Signaling of pseudo-wire is already covered
in PWE3
(for PW setup and
maintenance)...
Hamid.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C32C41.1E3C19DC--
From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Fri Jun 6 12:00:05 2003
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged))
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA29820
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 12:00:05 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h56Fxct03763
for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 11:59:38 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56FxcB03760
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 11:59:38 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA29774
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 11:59:35 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OJb4-0003Rf-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 11:57:43 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OJb4-0003Rc-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 11:57:42 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56FxAB03725;
Fri, 6 Jun 2003 11:59:10 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56FwjB03666
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 11:58:45 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA29725
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 11:58:42 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OJaD-0003Qk-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 11:56:49 -0400
Received: from zcars04f.nortelnetworks.com ([47.129.242.57])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OJaD-0003Q7-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 11:56:49 -0400
Received: from zcard309.ca.nortel.com (zcard309.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.69])
by zcars04f.nortelnetworks.com (Switch-2.2.6/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id h56Fw9829805;
Fri, 6 Jun 2003 11:58:09 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by zcard309.ca.nortel.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
id ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 11:58:10 -0400
Message-ID:
From: "Hamid Ould-Brahim"
To: Alex Zinin , l2vpn@ietf.org
Subject: RE: Updated L2VPN WG charter
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 11:58:09 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C32C44.6D246B8C"
Sender: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Id:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C32C44.6D246B8C
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Noticed that in the l2vpn charter:
> JAN 2004 Submit IP VPN solution documents to IESG
Needs to be taken out (must be copy and paste
problem).
Hamid.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C32C44.6D246B8C
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Noticed that in the l2vpn
charter:
> JAN 2004 Submit IP VPN
solution documents to IESG
Needs to be taken out (must be copy
and paste
problem).
Hamid.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C32C44.6D246B8C--
From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Fri Jun 6 13:21:12 2003
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged))
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA03176
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:21:12 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h56HKlo11613
for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:20:47 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56HKlB11610
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:20:47 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA03171
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:20:41 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OKrZ-0004Mh-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 13:18:49 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OKrY-0004MZ-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 13:18:48 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56HK7B11568;
Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:20:07 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56HJSB11515
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:19:28 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA03135
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:19:22 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OKqI-0004Ls-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 13:17:30 -0400
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] ident=mailnull)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OKqH-0004Lp-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 13:17:30 -0400
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] helo=127.0.0.1)
by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1)
id 19OKs1-0004F0-00; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 17:19:17 +0000
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 10:19:01 -0700
From: Alex Zinin
X-Mailer: The Bat! (v1.62i) Personal
Reply-To: Alex Zinin
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Message-ID: <1181175842071.20030606101901@psg.com>
To: "Cheng-Yin Lee"
CC: l2vpn@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Draft charter for L2VPN - IPLS & ARP Mediation
In-Reply-To: <3EE0A294.E6E43838@alcatel.com>
References:
<1171117877923.20030605181257@psg.com> <3EE0A294.E6E43838@alcatel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Id:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cheng-Yin,
This is what I tried to do. From the updated charter:
> 3. IP-only L2 VPNs--L2 service across an IP and an MPLS-enabled
> IP network, allowing standard IP devices to communicate with each
> other as if they were connected to a common LAN segment or a point-
> to-point circuit.
...
> 6. Interworking of IP devices connected to an IP-only L2 VPN using
> dissimilar attachment circuits. This topic will be explored only
> after the basic L2VPN services (VPWS, VPLS, and IP L2VPN) are
> defined.
--
Alex
http://www.psg.com/~zinin/
Friday, June 6, 2003, 7:17:56 AM, Cheng-Yin Lee wrote:
> Alex,
> Similar to emulated LAN service (that you have defined in the L2VPN
> charter), I think it would be useful to define the service (the problem
> being solved) being specified here instead of stating the solution
> (IPLS).
> Thanks
> Cheng-Yin
> Alex Zinin wrote:
>>
>> Folks-
>>
>> OK, not much additional support on the list, but my overall
>> impression based on what we saw here previously and my off-line
>> conversations is that we should put these two topics in the charter
>> (with the caveat that IP-only interworking will be addressed after
>> the basic mechanisms) and shut the door for now.
>>
>> Stay tuned, I'll be sending the updated charter tonight.
>>
>> Alex
From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Fri Jun 6 13:27:25 2003
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged))
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA03346
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:27:25 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h56HR0K11985
for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:27:00 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56HR0B11982
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:27:00 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA03331
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:26:54 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OKxY-0004PK-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 13:25:01 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OKxY-0004PH-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 13:25:00 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56HQBB11920;
Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:26:11 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56HOMB11798
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:24:22 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA03288
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:24:16 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OKv0-0004Oi-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 13:22:22 -0400
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] ident=mailnull)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OKuz-0004OV-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 13:22:22 -0400
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] helo=127.0.0.1)
by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1)
id 19OKwh-0004VK-00; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 17:24:07 +0000
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 10:23:51 -0700
From: Alex Zinin
X-Mailer: The Bat! (v1.62i) Personal
Reply-To: Alex Zinin
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Message-ID: <951176132418.20030606102351@psg.com>
To: "Hamid Ould-Brahim"
CC: l2vpn@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Updated L2VPN WG charter
In-Reply-To:
References:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Id:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hamid,
>> JAN 2004 Submit IP VPN solution documents to IESG
> Needs to be taken out (must be copy and paste
> problem).
That should map to IP-only L2VPNs. Let's make it
JAN 2004 Submit IP-only L2VPN solution documents to IESG
Alex
From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Fri Jun 6 13:50:16 2003
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged))
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA04449
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:50:16 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h56Hnos14443
for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:49:50 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56HnoB14440
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:49:50 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA04417
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:49:46 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OLJe-0004i9-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 13:47:50 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OLJd-0004i6-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 13:47:49 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56Hn3B14327;
Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:49:03 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56Hm3B14187
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:48:03 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA04325
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:47:58 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OLHu-0004gX-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 13:46:02 -0400
Received: from zcars0m9.nortelnetworks.com ([47.129.242.157])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OLHs-0004fv-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 13:46:00 -0400
Received: from zcard309.ca.nortel.com (zcard309.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.69])
by zcars0m9.nortelnetworks.com (Switch-2.2.6/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id h56HlKl08364;
Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:47:20 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by zcard309.ca.nortel.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
id ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:47:21 -0400
Message-ID:
From: "Hamid Ould-Brahim"
To: Alex Zinin , l2vpn@ietf.org
Subject: RE: Updated L2VPN WG charter
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:47:20 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C32C53.ADB8B27A"
Sender: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Id:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C32C53.ADB8B27A
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Alex,
Could you clarify the "MPLS-enabled IP network" expression
used in the charter in different places? Why not just mention
MPLS network (which implies IP anyway)? (I am not aware of
existence of MPLS-enabled non-IP network). Something in mind?
Hamid.
>
> 1. Virtual Private LAN Service--L2 service that emulates LAN
> across an IP and an MPLS-enabled IP network, allowing standard
> Ethernet devices communicate with each other as if they were
> connected to a common LAN segment.
>
> 2. Virtual Private Wire Service--L2 service that provides L2
> point-to-point connectivity (e.g. Frame Relay DLCI, ATM VPI/VCI,
> point-to-point Ethernet) across an IP and an MPLS-enabled
> IP network.
>
> 3. IP-only L2 VPNs--L2 service across an IP and an MPLS-enabled
> IP network, allowing standard IP devices to communicate with each
> other as if they were connected to a common LAN segment or a point-
> to-point circuit.
>
> The WG will address intra-AS scenarios only at this point (other
> scenarios will be considered for inclusion in the updated
> charter when
> the current one is completed.)
>
> 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.
> The group will review proposed protocol extensions for L2VPNs before
> they are recommended to appropriate protocol-specific WGs.
> As a specific example, this WG will not define new encapsulation
> mechanism, but will use those defined in the PWE3 WG.
>
> The WG will work on the following items. Adding new work items
> will require rechartering.
>
> 1. Discovery of PEs participating in L2 service, and
> topology of required connectivity
>
> 2. Signaling of pseudo-wire and service parameters
>
> 3. Solution documents (providing the framework for a specific
> solution, should include info on how discovery, signaling,
> and encaps work together, include security, AS as a separate
> document)
>
> 4. MIBs
>
> 5. L2VPN-specific OAM extensions--extensions to existing OAM
> solutions for VPLS and VPWS.
>
> 6. Interworking of IP devices connected to an IP-only L2 VPN using
> dissimilar attachment circuits. This topic will be explored only
> after the basic L2VPN services (VPWS, VPLS, and IP L2VPN) are
> defined.
>
> Where necessary, the WG will coordinate its activities with IEEE 802.1
>
> Milestones (optimistic):
>
> JUL 2003 Submit L2 requirements to IESG for publication as
> Informational RFC
> JUL 2003 Submit L2 framework to IESG for publication as
> Informational RFC
> JUL 2003 Identify VPLS and VPWS solutions for the WG
> AUG 2003 Submit an I-D describing MIB for VPLS
> AUG 2003 Submit an I-D describing MIB for VPWS
> AUG 2003 Submit an I-D on OAM for VPLS
> AUG 2003 Submit an I-D on OAM for VPWS
> DEC 2003 Submit VPLS solution documents to IESG
> DEC 2003 Submit VPWS solution documents to IESG
> JAN 2004 Submit IP VPN solution documents to IESG
> FEB 2004 Submit MIB for VPLS to IESG
> FEB 2004 Submit MIB for VPWS to IESG
> MAR 2004 Submit OAM for VPLS to IESG
> MAR 2004 Submit OAM for VPWS to IESG
>
>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C32C53.ADB8B27A
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Alex,
Could you clarify the
"MPLS-enabled IP network" expression
used in the charter in different places?
Why not just mention
MPLS network (which implies IP anyway)? (I am not aware
of
existence of MPLS-enabled non-IP network). Something in mind?
Hamid.
>
>
1. Virtual Private LAN Service--L2 service that emulates
LAN
> across an IP and an MPLS-enabled IP network,
allowing standard
> Ethernet devices communicate with
each other as if they were
> connected to a common LAN
segment.
>
> 2. Virtual Private Wire Service--L2 service that
provides L2
> point-to-point connectivity (e.g. Frame
Relay DLCI, ATM VPI/VCI,
> point-to-point Ethernet)
across an IP and an MPLS-enabled
> IP network.
>
> 3. IP-only
L2 VPNs--L2 service across an IP and an MPLS-enabled
>
IP network, allowing standard IP devices to communicate with
each
> other as if they were connected to a common LAN
segment or a point-
> to-point circuit.
>
>
The WG will address intra-AS scenarios only at this point (other
>
scenarios will be considered for inclusion in the updated
> charter
when
> the current one is completed.)
>
> 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.
> The group will review
proposed protocol extensions for L2VPNs before
> they are recommended to
appropriate protocol-specific WGs.
> As a specific example, this WG will
not define new encapsulation
> mechanism, but will use those defined in
the PWE3 WG.
>
> The WG will work on the following items. Adding new
work items
> will require rechartering.
>
> 1. Discovery of
PEs participating in L2 service, and
> topology of
required connectivity
>
> 2. Signaling of pseudo-wire and service
parameters
>
> 3. Solution documents (providing the framework for a
specific
> solution, should include info on how
discovery, signaling,
> and encaps work together,
include security, AS as a separate
>
document)
>
> 4. MIBs
>
> 5.
L2VPN-specific OAM extensions--extensions to existing
OAM
> solutions for VPLS and VPWS.
>
> 6.
Interworking of IP devices connected to an IP-only L2 VPN
using
> dissimilar attachment circuits. This topic will
be explored only
> after the basic L2VPN services (VPWS,
VPLS, and IP L2VPN) are
> defined.
>
> Where
necessary, the WG will coordinate its activities with IEEE
802.1
>
> Milestones (optimistic):
>
>
JUL 2003 Submit L2 requirements to IESG for publication as
>
Informational RFC
> JUL 2003 Submit L2 framework to IESG for
publication as
> Informational RFC
> JUL 2003 Identify VPLS
and VPWS solutions for the WG
> AUG 2003 Submit an I-D describing
MIB for VPLS
> AUG 2003 Submit an I-D describing MIB for
VPWS
> AUG 2003 Submit an I-D on OAM for VPLS
> AUG 2003
Submit an I-D on OAM for VPWS
> DEC 2003 Submit VPLS solution
documents to IESG
> DEC 2003 Submit VPWS solution documents to
IESG
> JAN 2004 Submit IP VPN solution documents to IESG
> FEB
2004 Submit MIB for VPLS to IESG
> FEB 2004 Submit MIB for
VPWS to IESG
> MAR 2004 Submit OAM for VPLS to IESG
> MAR
2004 Submit OAM for VPWS to IESG
>
>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C32C53.ADB8B27A--
From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Fri Jun 6 13:51:07 2003
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged))
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA04485
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:51:07 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h56Hof314572
for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:50:41 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56HodB14568
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:50:39 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA04477
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:50:35 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OLKR-0004ib-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 13:48:39 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OLKQ-0004iY-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 13:48:38 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56Ho0B14497;
Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:50:00 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56Hn3B14343
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:49:03 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA04374
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:48:59 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OLIt-0004hY-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 13:47:03 -0400
Received: from zcars0m9.nortelnetworks.com ([47.129.242.157])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OLIr-0004gn-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 13:47:02 -0400
Received: from zcard309.ca.nortel.com (zcard309.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.69])
by zcars0m9.nortelnetworks.com (Switch-2.2.6/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id h56HmMl08479;
Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:48:22 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by zcard309.ca.nortel.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
id ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:48:23 -0400
Message-ID:
From: "Hamid Ould-Brahim"
To: Alex Zinin
Cc: l2vpn@ietf.org
Subject: RE: Updated L2VPN WG charter
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 13:48:21 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C32C53.D241DBA8"
Sender: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Id:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C32C53.D241DBA8
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Hamid,
>
> >> JAN 2004 Submit IP VPN solution documents to IESG
>
> > Needs to be taken out (must be copy and paste
> > problem).
>
> That should map to IP-only L2VPNs. Let's make it
>
> JAN 2004 Submit IP-only L2VPN solution documents to IESG
>
Okay.
Hamid.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C32C53.D241DBA8
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Hamid,
>
>
>> JAN 2004 Submit IP VPN solution documents to IESG
>
>
> Needs to be taken out (must be copy and paste
> >
problem).
>
> That should map to IP-only L2VPNs. Let's make
it
>
> JAN 2004 Submit IP-only L2VPN solution documents to
IESG
>
Okay.
Hamid.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C32C53.D241DBA8--
From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Fri Jun 6 14:07:16 2003
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged))
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA05257
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:07:16 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h56I6pl15638
for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:06:51 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56I6nB15635
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:06:49 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA05212
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:06:44 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OLa4-0004xp-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 14:04:48 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OLa4-0004xi-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 14:04:48 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56I69B15597;
Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:06:09 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56I5ZB15549
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:05:35 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA05117
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:05:30 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OLYs-0004vp-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 14:03:34 -0400
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] ident=mailnull)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OLYr-0004vi-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 14:03:34 -0400
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] helo=127.0.0.1)
by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1)
id 19OLab-000755-00; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 18:05:21 +0000
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 11:05:05 -0700
From: Alex Zinin
X-Mailer: The Bat! (v1.62i) Personal
Reply-To: Alex Zinin
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Message-ID: <1181178605935.20030606110505@psg.com>
To: "Hamid Ould-Brahim"
CC: l2vpn@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Updated L2VPN WG charter
In-Reply-To:
References:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Id:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hamid,
> Could you clarify the "MPLS-enabled IP network" expression
> used in the charter in different places? Why not just mention
> MPLS network (which implies IP anyway)? (I am not aware of
> existence of MPLS-enabled non-IP network). Something in mind?
"MPLS-enable IP network" is intended to mean "an IP network that
supports MPLS functionality".
The main idea behind "across an IP and an MPLS-enabled IP network" is
to say that the services should be able to work across pure-IP as well
as MPLS/IP networks.
Do you have some concerns?
Alex
From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Fri Jun 6 14:14:20 2003
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged))
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA05624
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:14:20 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h56IDtR16946
for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:13:55 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56IDsB16943
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:13:54 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA05606
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:13:50 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OLgw-00053a-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 14:11:54 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OLgv-00053X-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 14:11:53 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56ID8B16862;
Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:13:08 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56IBMB16718
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:11:22 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA05439
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:11:17 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OLeT-00051S-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 14:09:21 -0400
Received: from zcars0m9.nortelnetworks.com ([47.129.242.157])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OLeR-00050v-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 14:09:20 -0400
Received: from zcard309.ca.nortel.com (zcard309.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.69])
by zcars0m9.nortelnetworks.com (Switch-2.2.6/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id h56IAdl25410;
Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:10:39 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by zcard309.ca.nortel.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
id ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:10:39 -0400
Message-ID:
From: "Hamid Ould-Brahim"
To: Alex Zinin
Cc: l2vpn@ietf.org
Subject: RE: Updated L2VPN WG charter
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:10:39 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C32C56.EF4FA16E"
Sender: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Id:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C32C56.EF4FA16E
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Alex,
>
> > Could you clarify the "MPLS-enabled IP network" expression
> > used in the charter in different places? Why not just mention
> > MPLS network (which implies IP anyway)? (I am not aware of
> > existence of MPLS-enabled non-IP network). Something in mind?
>
> "MPLS-enable IP network" is intended to mean "an IP network that
> supports MPLS functionality".
>
> The main idea behind "across an IP and an MPLS-enabled IP network" is
> to say that the services should be able to work across pure-IP as well
> as MPLS/IP networks.
>
Okay. Maybe to be more accurate the charter should mention
"Non-MPLS enabled IP network" (for pure IP) and
MPLS-enabled IP network (which includes MPLS, and IP)...
(I won't insist on that though...)
> Do you have some concerns?
>
No. It was just a clarification. Thanks.
Hamid.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C32C56.EF4FA16E
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Alex,
>
> > Could you clarify the
"MPLS-enabled IP network" expression
> > used in the charter in
different places? Why not just mention
> > MPLS network (which implies
IP anyway)? (I am not aware of
> > existence of MPLS-enabled non-IP
network). Something in mind?
>
> "MPLS-enable IP network" is
intended to mean "an IP network that
> supports MPLS
functionality".
>
> The main idea behind "across an IP and an
MPLS-enabled IP network" is
> to say that the services should be able to
work across pure-IP as well
> as MPLS/IP
networks.
>
Okay. Maybe to be more accurate the
charter should mention
"Non-MPLS enabled IP network" (for pure IP)
and
MPLS-enabled IP network (which includes
MPLS, and IP)...
(I won't insist on that
though...)
> Do you have some concerns?
>
No. It was just a clarification. Thanks.
Hamid.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C32C56.EF4FA16E--
From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Fri Jun 6 14:15:05 2003
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged))
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA05656
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:15:05 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h56IEeV17023
for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:14:40 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56IEdB17020
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:14:40 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA05644
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:14:35 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OLhf-00054B-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 14:12:39 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OLhe-000548-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 14:12:38 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56IE0B16986;
Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:14:00 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56ID3B16852
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:13:03 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA05555
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:12:57 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OLg5-00052q-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 14:11:02 -0400
Received: from [64.47.48.7] (helo=exchange.timetra.com)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OLg4-00052U-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 14:11:01 -0400
Received: from vkompella ([64.47.48.10] RDNS failed) by exchange.timetra.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329);
Fri, 6 Jun 2003 11:12:21 -0700
Reply-To:
From: "Vach Kompella"
To: "Hamid Ould-Brahim" ,
"Alex Zinin" ,
Subject: RE: Updated L2VPN WG charter
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 11:12:55 -0700
Message-ID:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
In-Reply-To:
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4920.2300
Importance: Normal
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Jun 2003 18:12:21.0851 (UTC) FILETIME=[2C990AB0:01C32C57]
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Id:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hamid,
>>
>> 2. Signaling of pseudo-wire and service parameters
>>
> I think it should be:
>
> "2. Signaling for the purpose of establishing l2vpns"
> or along these lines...
Agree. Without actually specifying a particular solution, it may be that the
signaling for l2vpns rides over the same signaling used for setting up the PWs,
and in that sense, qualifies the PW signaling. That would tie in well with
using PWs as defined by PWE3.
-Vach
From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Fri Jun 6 14:17:06 2003
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged))
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA05748
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:17:06 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h56IGfT17143
for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:16:41 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56IGfB17140
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:16:41 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA05744
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:16:36 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OLjc-00055Q-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 14:14:40 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OLjb-00055N-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 14:14:39 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56IG1B17102;
Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:16:01 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56IFcB17077
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:15:38 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA05699
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:15:33 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OLib-00054k-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 14:13:37 -0400
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] ident=mailnull)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OLia-00054c-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 14:13:37 -0400
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] helo=127.0.0.1)
by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1)
id 19OLkL-0007dq-00; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 18:15:25 +0000
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 11:15:08 -0700
From: Alex Zinin
X-Mailer: The Bat! (v1.62i) Personal
Reply-To: Alex Zinin
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Message-ID: <951179209353.20030606111508@psg.com>
To: "Hamid Ould-Brahim"
CC: l2vpn@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Updated L2VPN WG charter
In-Reply-To:
References:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Id:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hamid,
> Okay. Maybe to be more accurate the charter should mention
> "Non-MPLS enabled IP network" (for pure IP) and
> MPLS-enabled IP network (which includes MPLS, and IP)...
> (I won't insist on that though...)
It seems that the current text reflects the idea, and I'd rather limit
the changes, as the text we started with was reviewed within the IESG.
So, I guess I'll take you up on "I won't insist" ;)
Thanks
Alex
From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Fri Jun 6 14:28:16 2003
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged))
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA06245
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:28:16 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h56IRp217744
for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:27:51 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56IRpB17741
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:27:51 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA06210
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:27:46 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OLuQ-0005CD-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 14:25:50 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OLuP-0005CA-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 14:25:49 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56IR9B17716;
Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:27:09 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56IQwB17695
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:26:58 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA06182
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:26:52 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OLtZ-0005Bz-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 14:24:57 -0400
Received: from zcars04f.nortelnetworks.com ([47.129.242.57])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OLtX-0005Bl-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 14:24:56 -0400
Received: from zcard309.ca.nortel.com (zcard309.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.69])
by zcars04f.nortelnetworks.com (Switch-2.2.6/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id h56IQA823383;
Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:26:10 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by zcard309.ca.nortel.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
id ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:26:10 -0400
Message-ID:
From: "Hamid Ould-Brahim"
To: vkompella@timetra.com, Alex Zinin , l2vpn@ietf.org
Subject: RE: Updated L2VPN WG charter
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:26:10 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C32C59.1A827B7A"
Sender: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Id:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C32C59.1A827B7A
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Vach,
>
> >>
> >> 2. Signaling of pseudo-wire and service parameters
> >>
>
> > I think it should be:
> >
> > "2. Signaling for the purpose of establishing l2vpns"
> > or along these lines...
>
> Agree. Without actually specifying a particular solution, it
> may be that the
> signaling for l2vpns rides over the same signaling used for
> setting up the PWs,
> and in that sense, qualifies the PW signaling. That would
> tie in well with
> using PWs as defined by PWE3.
>
Agreed.
Hamid.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C32C59.1A827B7A
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Vach,
>
> >>
>
>> 2. Signaling of pseudo-wire and service parameters
>
>>
>
> > I think it should be:
> >
> >
"2. Signaling for the purpose of establishing l2vpns"
> > or along
these lines...
>
> Agree. Without actually specifying a
particular solution, it
> may be that the
> signaling for l2vpns
rides over the same signaling used for
> setting up the PWs,
> and
in that sense, qualifies the PW signaling. That would
> tie in well
with
> using PWs as defined by PWE3.
>
Agreed.
Hamid.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C32C59.1A827B7A--
From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Fri Jun 6 17:19:01 2003
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged))
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA13617
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 17:19:01 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h56LIZo31606
for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 17:18:35 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56LIZB31603
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 17:18:35 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA13576
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 17:18:30 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OOZg-0006fj-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 17:16:37 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OOZg-0006fe-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 17:16:36 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56LI9B31562;
Fri, 6 Jun 2003 17:18:09 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h56LH7B31513
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 17:17:07 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA13414
for ; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 17:17:03 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OOYH-0006eE-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 17:15:09 -0400
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] ident=mailnull)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19OOYG-0006e9-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 17:15:08 -0400
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] helo=127.0.0.1)
by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1)
id 19OOZn-000JoW-00; Fri, 06 Jun 2003 21:16:43 +0000
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 14:16:18 -0700
From: Alex Zinin
X-Mailer: The Bat! (v1.62i) Personal
Reply-To: Alex Zinin
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Message-ID: <1231190078772.20030606141618@psg.com>
To: "Vach Kompella"
CC: "Hamid Ould-Brahim" , l2vpn@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Updated L2VPN WG charter
In-Reply-To:
References:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Id:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
OK, how about "Signaling of l2vpn service parameters"?
Alex
Friday, June 6, 2003, 11:12:55 AM, Vach Kompella wrote:
> Hamid,
>>>
>>> 2. Signaling of pseudo-wire and service parameters
>>>
>> I think it should be:
>>
>> "2. Signaling for the purpose of establishing l2vpns"
>> or along these lines...
> Agree. Without actually specifying a particular solution, it may be that the
> signaling for l2vpns rides over the same signaling used for setting up the PWs,
> and in that sense, qualifies the PW signaling. That would tie in well with
> using PWs as defined by PWE3.
> -Vach
From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Sat Jun 7 15:02:06 2003
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged))
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA18567
for ; Sat, 7 Jun 2003 15:02:05 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h57J1gx20113
for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 7 Jun 2003 15:01:42 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h57J1fB20110
for ; Sat, 7 Jun 2003 15:01:41 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA18556
for ; Sat, 7 Jun 2003 15:01:35 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19Oiuh-0005Fy-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Jun 2003 14:59:39 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19Oiug-0005Fu-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Jun 2003 14:59:38 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h57J1DB20102;
Sat, 7 Jun 2003 15:01:13 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h57J0vB20061
for ; Sat, 7 Jun 2003 15:00:57 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA18540
for ; Sat, 7 Jun 2003 15:00:51 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19Oitz-0005Fo-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Jun 2003 14:58:55 -0400
Received: from mailf.telia.com ([194.22.194.25])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19Oity-0005Fe-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Jun 2003 14:58:54 -0400
Received: from d1o888.telia.com (d1o888.telia.com [213.67.172.241])
by mailf.telia.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h57J0jCg029714;
Sat, 7 Jun 2003 21:00:50 +0200 (CEST)
X-Original-Recipient: l2vpn@ietf.org
Received: from pi.se (h45n1fls31o888.telia.com [213.67.172.45])
by d1o888.telia.com (8.10.2p2/8.10.1) with ESMTP id h57J0hc22094;
Sat, 7 Jun 2003 21:00:43 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <3EE2354E.2000309@pi.se>
Date: Sat, 07 Jun 2003 20:56:14 +0200
From: Loa Andersson
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020605
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: l2vpn
CC: Alex Zinin , Thomas Narten
Subject: Re: Updated L2VPN WG charter
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by mailf.telia.com id h57J0jCg029714
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by www1.ietf.org id h57J0wB20062
Sender: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Id:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by www1.ietf.org id h57J1DB20102
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by www1.ietf.org id h57J1fB20110
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
L2VPNers,
I've put a few questions into the updated version of the l2vpn charter,
background is some wg chair experiences, so it is at this point rather
formalistic issues. The kind of stuff a wg chair will ask him- or
herself when approached by people wanting to do (not to do) certain
things at a specific point in time.
Note: at this time I'm still playing catch up and is not through all
my mail and haven read this thread to the end, Soit is possible that
I'm knocking in open doors. In that case just ignore.
/Loa
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Layer 2 Virtual Private Networks (l2vpn)
Chairs:
Area Director(s):
Thomas Narten
Erik Nordmark
Area Advisor:
Thomas Narten
Technical Advisor:
Alex Zinin
Description of Working Group:
This working group is responsible for defining and specifying a
limited number of solutions
Qustion: What is a limited number of solutions? Understanding that
it is not possible to give an exact number, there is nevertehless
a need to understand what the limitations are. A 100 is still liomited,
but so is 1 or 2.
for supporting provider-provisioned
layer-2 virtual private networks (L2VPNs).
The WG is responsible for standardization of the following solutions:
1. Virtual Private LAN Service--L2 service that emulates LAN
across an IP and an MPLS-enabled IP network, allowing standard
Ethernet devices communicate with each other as if they were
connected to a common LAN segment.
Question: Since there are no MPLS enabled networks that are not IP
networks (control by an IP routing protocól), it is an open
issue how to read this.
Should it be read as:
a. one solution for IP networks
b. another for MPLS enabled networks
c. or a common solutions that works in both MPLS enabled
networks and in IP networks that is not MPLS enabled
2. Virtual Private Wire Service--L2 service that provides L2
point-to-point connectivity (e.g. Frame Relay DLCI, ATM VPI/VCI,
point-to-point Ethernet) across an IP and an MPLS-enabled IP network.
Question: Same as for item 1.
3. IP-only L2 VPNs--L2 service across an IP and an MPLS-enabled
IP network, allowing standard IP devices to communicate with each
other as if they were connected to a common LAN segment or a point-
to-point circuit.
The WG will address intra-AS scenarios only at this point (other
scenarios will be considered for inclusion in the updated charter when
the current one is completed.)
Question: "Completed" is fuzzy, when is something completed
- wg last call done,
- sent to the iesg for review
- iesg decision
- published as RFC.
It is likely that the point in time is when the previous
task is "90% done" is when something could be viewed as
completed from a wg point of view.
One would need more freedom, and the IETF process is probably
good enough "after the wg have requested a charter update
from the iesg and have had that request approved".
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.
The group will review proposed protocol extensions for L2VPNs before
they are recommended to appropriate protocol-specific WGs.
Question: Can't make head an tail of this. If the wg produces
"requirements" to be sent to a protocol specific wg,
once this is done the work will be done within that wg.
No? If not is the process that we produce "requirements"
that will be "discussed in the protocol specific wg" and
once approved by wg and the iesg, the l2vpn wg will
develop the extensions that will go through the same
process. Could become a bit cumbersome.
If we are not doing the extension, how do we make sure
that we have the attention on the other working group.
As a specific example, this WG will not define new encapsulation
mechanism, but will use those defined in the PWE3 WG.
The WG will work on the following items. Adding new work items
will require rechartering: rechartering.
Question: This is possibly too restrictive, we might see that there are
work items that are "within charter" and we would like to
undertake those task, but it wouldn't require a new charter.
1. Discovery of PEs participating in L2 service, and
topology of required connectivity
2. Signaling of pseudo-wire and service parameters
3. Solution documents (providing the framework for a specific
solution, should include info on how discovery, signaling,
and encaps work together, include security, AS as a separate
document)
4. MIBs
5. L2VPN-specific OAM extensions--extensions to existing OAM
solutions for VPLS and VPWS.
Question: OAM for IP only L2VPNs?
6. Interworking of IP devices connected to an IP-only L2 VPN using
dissimilar attachment circuits. This topic will be explored only
after the basic L2VPN services (VPWS, VPLS, and IP L2VPN) are
defined.
Where necessary, the WG will coordinate its activities with IEEE 802.1
Question: Wouldn't it be appropriate to look into re-using mechanisms
that are (have been) developed by the l3vpn wg? And the other
way around?
Or is this within the IETF mode of working, and need not to
be explicitly stated?
Milestones (optimistic):
JUL 2003 Submit L2 requirements to IESG for publication as
Informational RFC
JUL 2003 Submit L2 framework to IESG for publication as
Informational RFC
JUL 2003 Identify VPLS and VPWS solutions for the WG
AUG 2003 Submit an I-D describing MIB for VPLS
AUG 2003 Submit an I-D describing MIB for VPWS
AUG 2003 Submit an I-D on OAM for VPLS
AUG 2003 Submit an I-D on OAM for VPWS
DEC 2003 Submit VPLS solution documents to IESG
DEC 2003 Submit VPWS solution documents to IESG
JAN 2004 Submit IP VPN solution documents to IESG
FEB 2004 Submit MIB for VPLS to IESG
FEB 2004 Submit MIB for VPWS to IESG
MAR 2004 Submit OAM for VPLS to IESG
MAR 2004 Submit OAM for VPWS to IESG
--
/Loa
mobile + 46 739 81 21 64
email: loa@pi.se
From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Mon Jun 9 11:12:42 2003
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged))
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA08234
for ; Mon, 9 Jun 2003 11:12:42 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h59FCEI09366
for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 9 Jun 2003 11:12:14 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h59FCEB09359
for ; Mon, 9 Jun 2003 11:12:14 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA08215
for ; Mon, 9 Jun 2003 11:12:11 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19POHk-0004C5-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2003 11:10:12 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19POHj-0004Bt-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2003 11:10:11 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h59FBeB09254;
Mon, 9 Jun 2003 11:11:40 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h59F8TB09089
for ; Mon, 9 Jun 2003 11:08:29 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA08061
for ; Mon, 9 Jun 2003 11:08:22 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19POE2-00048e-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2003 11:06:22 -0400
Received: from zcars04f.nortelnetworks.com ([47.129.242.57])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19POE1-00048K-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2003 11:06:21 -0400
Received: from zcard309.ca.nortel.com (zcard309.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.69])
by zcars04f.nortelnetworks.com (Switch-2.2.6/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id h59F7en11912;
Mon, 9 Jun 2003 11:07:41 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by zcard309.ca.nortel.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
id ; Mon, 9 Jun 2003 11:07:41 -0400
Message-ID:
From: "Hamid Ould-Brahim"
To: Alex Zinin , Vach Kompella
Cc: l2vpn@ietf.org
Subject: RE: Updated L2VPN WG charter
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 11:07:40 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C32E98.DEB8B23E"
Sender: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Id:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C32E98.DEB8B23E
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Alex,
>
> OK, how about "Signaling of l2vpn service parameters"?
Okay. But I am afraid the term "parameters" will be
interpreted as the stuff that goes after the signaling
info used for the purpose of connectivity (stuff like
optional parameters, etc)...
Hamid.
> Alex
>
> Friday, June 6, 2003, 11:12:55 AM, Vach Kompella wrote:
> > Hamid,
>
> >>>
> >>> 2. Signaling of pseudo-wire and service parameters
> >>>
>
> >> I think it should be:
> >>
> >> "2. Signaling for the purpose of establishing l2vpns"
> >> or along these lines...
>
> > Agree. Without actually specifying a particular solution,
> it may be that the
> > signaling for l2vpns rides over the same signaling used for
> setting up the PWs,
> > and in that sense, qualifies the PW signaling. That would
> tie in well with
> > using PWs as defined by PWE3.
>
> > -Vach
>
>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C32E98.DEB8B23E
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Alex,
>
> OK, how about "Signaling
of l2vpn service parameters"?
Okay. But I am afraid the term
"parameters" will be
interpreted as the stuff that goes after
the signaling
info used for the purpose of connectivity
(stuff like
optional parameters, etc)...
Hamid.
> Alex
>
> Friday, June 6, 2003, 11:12:55 AM, Vach
Kompella wrote:
> > Hamid,
>
> >>>
>
>>> 2. Signaling of pseudo-wire and service parameters
>
>>>
>
> >> I think it should be:
>
>>
> >> "2. Signaling for the purpose of establishing
l2vpns"
> >> or along these lines...
>
> >
Agree. Without actually specifying a particular solution,
> it may
be that the
> > signaling for l2vpns rides over the same signaling used
for
> setting up the PWs,
> > and in that sense, qualifies the PW
signaling. That would
> tie in well with
> > using PWs as
defined by PWE3.
>
> > -Vach
>
>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C32E98.DEB8B23E--
From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Mon Jun 9 16:01:55 2003
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged))
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA19472
for ; Mon, 9 Jun 2003 16:01:55 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h59K1SI31891
for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 9 Jun 2003 16:01:28 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h59K1SB31888
for ; Mon, 9 Jun 2003 16:01:28 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA19448
for ; Mon, 9 Jun 2003 16:01:24 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19PSnd-0006dK-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2003 15:59:25 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19PSnc-0006dH-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2003 15:59:24 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h59K17B31861;
Mon, 9 Jun 2003 16:01:07 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h59K0LB31779
for ; Mon, 9 Jun 2003 16:00:21 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA19419
for ; Mon, 9 Jun 2003 16:00:17 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19PSmX-0006cm-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2003 15:58:17 -0400
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] ident=mailnull)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19PSmW-0006ci-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2003 15:58:16 -0400
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] helo=127.0.0.1)
by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1)
id 19PSoS-000Fip-00; Mon, 09 Jun 2003 20:00:16 +0000
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 12:59:51 -0700
From: Alex Zinin
X-Mailer: The Bat! (v1.62i) Personal
Reply-To: Alex Zinin
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Message-ID: <15096265852.20030609125951@psg.com>
To: Loa Andersson
CC: l2vpn , Thomas Narten
Subject: Re: Updated L2VPN WG charter
In-Reply-To: <3EE2354E.2000309@pi.se>
References: <3EE2354E.2000309@pi.se>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Sender: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Id:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by www1.ietf.org id h59K17B31861
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by www1.ietf.org id h59K1SB31888
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Loa,
> I've put a few questions into the updated version of the l2vpn charter,
> background is some wg chair experiences, so it is at this point rather
> formalistic issues. The kind of stuff a wg chair will ask him- or
> herself when approached by people wanting to do (not to do) certain
> things at a specific point in time.
> Note: at this time I'm still playing catch up and is not through all
> my mail and haven read this thread to the end, Soit is possible that
> I'm knocking in open doors. In that case just ignore.
Thanks for thoughtful comments. It is a good idea to clarify possible
interpretations now. Please see inline below
> This working group is responsible for defining and specifying a
> limited number of solutions
> Qustion: What is a limited number of solutions? Understanding that
> it is not possible to give an exact number, there is nevertehless
> a need to understand what the limitations are. A 100 is still liomited,
> but so is 1 or 2.
My opinion is that the _default_ mode for the WG should be one
solution per item of the list below (VPLS, VPWS, IPL2VPN), each going
to STD track. If the WG believes at some point that more than one is
necessary, than (as usual) a strong case would need to be made wrt why
one is not enough.
> Question: Since there are no MPLS enabled networks that are not IP
> networks (control by an IP routing protocól), it is an open
> issue how to read this.
> Should it be read as:
> a. one solution for IP networks
> b. another for MPLS enabled networks
> c. or a common solutions that works in both MPLS enabled
> networks and in IP networks that is not MPLS enabled
The intent is to say that the WG should aspire to "c" above.
> The WG will address intra-AS scenarios only at this point (other
> scenarios will be considered for inclusion in the updated charter when
> the current one is completed.)
> Question: "Completed" is fuzzy, when is something completed
> - wg last call done,
> - sent to the iesg for review
> - iesg decision
> - published as RFC.
I would consider an document/milestone completed when the IESG
review is completed and it's approved.
> It is likely that the point in time is when the previous
> task is "90% done" is when something could be viewed as
> completed from a wg point of view.
> One would need more freedom, and the IETF process is probably
> good enough "after the wg have requested a charter update
> from the iesg and have had that request approved".
The way I see this happening is that the WG chairs and ADs would
discuss the matter, and as soon as both sides are comfortable with
adding more work on the plate, new items would be taken on. The intent
of that piece of the charter is to set priorities for the WG.
> 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.
> The group will review proposed protocol extensions for L2VPNs before
> they are recommended to appropriate protocol-specific WGs.
> Question: Can't make head an tail of this. If the wg produces
> "requirements" to be sent to a protocol specific wg,
> once this is done the work will be done within that wg.
> No? If not is the process that we produce "requirements"
> that will be "discussed in the protocol specific wg" and
> once approved by wg and the iesg, the l2vpn wg will
> develop the extensions that will go through the same
> process. Could become a bit cumbersome.
> If we are not doing the extension, how do we make sure
> that we have the attention on the other working group.
We had a discussion about this on the list. The text above tries to
capture in a short form what I described in my message on May 9th:
Alex Zinin wrote:
[...]
> 3. In reality, what we want to achieve is the VPN community being
> able to propose and document extensions to existing protocols
> that would help VPN technology development. Also, before a given
> mechanism goes forward, we need to make sure that:
>
> a. The VPN community believes that it serves the purpose
> and the right way forward
>
> AND
>
> b. The protocol-specific community believes that using
> the protocol is a good idea and the way this is done
> is correct.
>
> Given that finally the extension specs have to live in the
> protocol-specific WGs, ow about we use the following process
> (draft):
>
> 1. VPN folks who believe that a given protocol extension
> is needed, come up with an individual draft describing
> the details.
>
> 2. The draft is brought to the appropriate VPN WG. A discussion
> on the mailing list AND in the room is held on the subject of
> why this is needed and whether this is a good idea VPN-wise.
> If there is no agreement on this--the draft does not go
> any further. Otherwise:
>
> 3. The draft is taken to the protocol-specific WG. The WG
> discusses if it is happy with it as a general approach, if
> so takes it as a WG item. Otherwise, the WG chairs summarize
> the discussion and send the summary to the VPN WG.
>
> 4. If the draft is accepted by the protocol-specific WG,
> the appropriate VPN framework document is updated to describe
> it and refer to the doc.
>
> 5. The WG chairs coordinate timing for the draft.
> When ready to go to IESG, the draft is LC'ed in both WGs.
Please see if this makes sense.
> The WG will work on the following items. Adding new work items
> will require rechartering: rechartering.
> Question: This is possibly too restrictive, we might see that there are
> work items that are "within charter" and we would like to
> undertake those task, but it wouldn't require a new charter.
The intent here is again to give WG chairs and ADs a tool to control
the amount of work in the WG. For instance, if we wanted to add QoS,
we would need to add an item to this list, and hence revise the
charter.
If an item is within the charter, then adding it should be a matter
of adding a milestone, which is a much less painful procedure.
> 1. Discovery of PEs participating in L2 service, and
> topology of required connectivity
> 2. Signaling of pseudo-wire and service parameters
> 3. Solution documents (providing the framework for a specific
> solution, should include info on how discovery, signaling,
> and encaps work together, include security, AS as a separate
> document)
> 4. MIBs
> 5. L2VPN-specific OAM extensions--extensions to existing OAM
> solutions for VPLS and VPWS.
> Question: OAM for IP only L2VPNs?
No objection
> 6. Interworking of IP devices connected to an IP-only L2 VPN using
> dissimilar attachment circuits. This topic will be explored only
> after the basic L2VPN services (VPWS, VPLS, and IP L2VPN) are
> defined.
> Where necessary, the WG will coordinate its activities with IEEE 802.1
> Question: Wouldn't it be appropriate to look into re-using mechanisms
> that are (have been) developed by the l3vpn wg? And the other
> way around?
> Or is this within the IETF mode of working, and need not to
> be explicitly stated?
I would say this consideration will anyways be on a case-by-case
basis, which is, as you say, already the normal IETF mode.
Thanks
Alex
From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Mon Jun 9 16:14:12 2003
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged))
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA19711
for ; Mon, 9 Jun 2003 16:14:11 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h59KDjv00702
for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 9 Jun 2003 16:13:45 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h59KDiB00699
for ; Mon, 9 Jun 2003 16:13:44 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA19705
for ; Mon, 9 Jun 2003 16:13:41 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19PSzV-0006h4-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2003 16:11:41 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19PSzU-0006h1-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2003 16:11:40 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h59KD3B00683;
Mon, 9 Jun 2003 16:13:03 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h59KCuB00668
for ; Mon, 9 Jun 2003 16:12:56 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA19702
for ; Mon, 9 Jun 2003 16:12:53 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19PSyj-0006gy-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2003 16:10:53 -0400
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] ident=mailnull)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19PSyi-0006gv-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2003 16:10:52 -0400
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] helo=127.0.0.1)
by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1)
id 19PSzv-000GJn-00; Mon, 09 Jun 2003 20:12:07 +0000
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 13:11:41 -0700
From: Alex Zinin
X-Mailer: The Bat! (v1.62i) Personal
Reply-To: Alex Zinin
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Message-ID: <15896976414.20030609131141@psg.com>
To: "Hamid Ould-Brahim"
CC: Vach Kompella , l2vpn@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Updated L2VPN WG charter
In-Reply-To:
References:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Id:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hamid,
>> OK, how about "Signaling of l2vpn service parameters"?
> Okay. But I am afraid the term "parameters" will be
> interpreted as the stuff that goes after the signaling
> info used for the purpose of connectivity (stuff like
> optional parameters, etc)...
Could you propose wording that would (to your mind) address your
concern?
Thanks.
Alex
From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Mon Jun 9 20:01:59 2003
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged))
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA25697
for ; Mon, 9 Jun 2003 20:01:59 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h5A01V615666
for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 9 Jun 2003 20:01:31 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5A01VB15660
for ; Mon, 9 Jun 2003 20:01:31 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA25691
for ; Mon, 9 Jun 2003 20:01:29 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19PWXw-00005V-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2003 19:59:28 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19PWXv-00005S-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2003 19:59:27 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5A01AB15640;
Mon, 9 Jun 2003 20:01:10 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h59NxLB15529
for ; Mon, 9 Jun 2003 19:59:21 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA25621
for ; Mon, 9 Jun 2003 19:59:18 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19PWVp-00004k-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2003 19:57:17 -0400
Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com ([64.102.124.13])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19PWVp-00004c-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2003 19:57:17 -0400
Received: from bucket.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@bucket.cisco.com [161.44.167.72])
by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h59Nwkpi026334
for ; Mon, 9 Jun 2003 19:58:47 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tnadeauw2k (rtp-vpn1-365.cisco.com [10.82.225.109])
by bucket.cisco.com (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.1.0.66-GA)
with ESMTP id AAC26292;
Mon, 9 Jun 2003 19:58:45 -0400 (EDT)
Reply-To:
From: "Thomas D. Nadeau"
To: "'l2vpn'"
Subject: RE: Updated L2VPN WG charter
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 19:58:41 -0400
Organization: Cisco Systems
Message-ID: <005101c32ee3$0dd877d0$6401a8c0@amer.cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4510
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <15096265852.20030609125951@psg.com>
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by www1.ietf.org id h59NxLB15530
Sender: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Id:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by www1.ietf.org id h5A01AB15640
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by www1.ietf.org id h5A01VB15660
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
> -----Original Message-----
> From: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org [mailto:l2vpn-admin@ietf.org] On
> Behalf Of Alex Zinin
> Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 4:00 PM
> To: Loa Andersson
> Cc: l2vpn; Thomas Narten
> Subject: Re: Updated L2VPN WG charter
>
>
> Loa,
>
> > I've put a few questions into the updated version of the l2vpn
> > charter, background is some wg chair experiences, so it is at this
> > point rather formalistic issues. The kind of stuff a wg
> chair will ask
> > him- or herself when approached by people wanting to do (not to do)
> > certain things at a specific point in time.
>
> > Note: at this time I'm still playing catch up and is not
> through all
> > my mail and haven read this thread to the end, Soit is
> possible that
> > I'm knocking in open doors. In that case just ignore.
>
> Thanks for thoughtful comments. It is a good idea to clarify
> possible interpretations now. Please see inline below
>
> > This working group is responsible for defining and specifying a
> > limited number of solutions
>
> > Qustion: What is a limited number of solutions?
> Understanding that it
> > is not possible to give an exact number, there is
> nevertehless a need
> > to understand what the limitations are. A 100 is still
> liomited, but
> > so is 1 or 2.
>
> My opinion is that the _default_ mode for the WG should be
> one solution per item of the list below (VPLS, VPWS,
> IPL2VPN), each going to STD track. If the WG believes at some
> point that more than one is necessary, than (as usual) a
> strong case would need to be made wrt why one is not enough.
Alex,
I like this idea in theory, but in practice, how is
the determination of going with one over the other going to
be made if the WG seems fairly divided? I have seen this
handled in different ways in different WGs in the past, but
it was never consistent. I guess we could always call in
the VP to breat the tie or flip a coin? *)
--tom
> > Question: Since there are no MPLS enabled networks that are not IP
> > networks (control by an IP routing protocól), it
> is an open
> > issue how to read this.
>
> > Should it be read as:
> > a. one solution for IP networks
> > b. another for MPLS enabled networks
> > c. or a common solutions that works in both MPLS enabled
> > networks and in IP networks that is not MPLS enabled
>
> The intent is to say that the WG should aspire to "c" above.
>
> > The WG will address intra-AS scenarios only at this point (other
> > scenarios will be considered for inclusion in the updated
> charter when
> > the current one is completed.)
>
> > Question: "Completed" is fuzzy, when is something completed
> > - wg last call done,
> > - sent to the iesg for review
> > - iesg decision
> > - published as RFC.
>
> I would consider an document/milestone completed when the
> IESG review is completed and it's approved.
>
> > It is likely that the point in time is when the previous
> > task is "90% done" is when something could be viewed as
> > completed from a wg point of view.
> > One would need more freedom, and the IETF
> process is probably
> > good enough "after the wg have requested a charter update
> > from the iesg and have had that request approved".
>
> The way I see this happening is that the WG chairs and ADs
> would discuss the matter, and as soon as both sides are
> comfortable with adding more work on the plate, new items
> would be taken on. The intent of that piece of the charter is
> to set priorities for the WG.
>
> > 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. The
> > group will review proposed protocol extensions for L2VPNs
> before they
> > are recommended to appropriate protocol-specific WGs.
>
> > Question: Can't make head an tail of this. If the wg produces
> > "requirements" to be sent to a protocol specific wg,
> > once this is done the work will be done within that wg.
> > No? If not is the process that we produce "requirements"
> > that will be "discussed in the protocol specific wg" and
> > once approved by wg and the iesg, the l2vpn wg will
> > develop the extensions that will go through the same
> > process. Could become a bit cumbersome.
> > If we are not doing the extension, how do we make sure
> > that we have the attention on the other working group.
>
> We had a discussion about this on the list. The text above
> tries to capture in a short form what I described in my
> message on May 9th:
>
> Alex Zinin wrote:
> [...]
> > 3. In reality, what we want to achieve is the VPN community being
> > able to propose and document extensions to existing protocols
> > that would help VPN technology development. Also, before a given
> > mechanism goes forward, we need to make sure that:
> >
> > a. The VPN community believes that it serves the purpose
> > and the right way forward
> >
> > AND
> >
> > b. The protocol-specific community believes that using
> > the protocol is a good idea and the way this is done
> > is correct.
> >
> > Given that finally the extension specs have to live in the
> > protocol-specific WGs, ow about we use the following process
> > (draft):
> >
> > 1. VPN folks who believe that a given protocol extension
> > is needed, come up with an individual draft describing
> > the details.
> >
> > 2. The draft is brought to the appropriate VPN WG. A discussion
> > on the mailing list AND in the room is held on the
> subject of
> > why this is needed and whether this is a good idea VPN-wise.
> > If there is no agreement on this--the draft does not go
> > any further. Otherwise:
> >
> > 3. The draft is taken to the protocol-specific WG. The WG
> > discusses if it is happy with it as a general approach, if
> > so takes it as a WG item. Otherwise, the WG chairs summarize
> > the discussion and send the summary to the VPN WG.
> >
> > 4. If the draft is accepted by the protocol-specific WG,
> > the appropriate VPN framework document is updated
> to describe
> > it and refer to the doc.
> >
> > 5. The WG chairs coordinate timing for the draft.
> > When ready to go to IESG, the draft is LC'ed in both WGs.
>
> Please see if this makes sense.
>
> > The WG will work on the following items. Adding new work items will
> > require rechartering: rechartering.
>
> > Question: This is possibly too restrictive, we might see
> that there are
> > work items that are "within charter" and we would like to
> > undertake those task, but it wouldn't require a new
> > charter.
>
> The intent here is again to give WG chairs and ADs a tool to
> control the amount of work in the WG. For instance, if we
> wanted to add QoS, we would need to add an item to this list,
> and hence revise the charter.
>
> If an item is within the charter, then adding it should be a
> matter of adding a milestone, which is a much less painful procedure.
>
> > 1. Discovery of PEs participating in L2 service, and
> > topology of required connectivity
>
> > 2. Signaling of pseudo-wire and service parameters
>
> > 3. Solution documents (providing the framework for a specific
> > solution, should include info on how discovery, signaling,
> > and encaps work together, include security, AS as a separate
> > document)
>
> > 4. MIBs
>
> > 5. L2VPN-specific OAM extensions--extensions to existing OAM
> > solutions for VPLS and VPWS.
>
> > Question: OAM for IP only L2VPNs?
>
> No objection
>
> > 6. Interworking of IP devices connected to an IP-only L2 VPN using
> > dissimilar attachment circuits. This topic will be explored only
> > after the basic L2VPN services (VPWS, VPLS, and IP L2VPN) are
> > defined.
>
> > Where necessary, the WG will coordinate its activities with
> IEEE 802.1
>
> > Question: Wouldn't it be appropriate to look into re-using
> mechanisms
> > that are (have been) developed by the l3vpn wg?
> And the other
> > way around?
> > Or is this within the IETF mode of working, and
> need not to
> > be explicitly stated?
>
> I would say this consideration will anyways be on a
> case-by-case basis, which is, as you say, already the normal
> IETF mode.
>
> Thanks
>
> Alex
>
>
From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Tue Jun 10 10:46:12 2003
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged))
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA03682
for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 10:46:12 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h5AEjmq28635
for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 10:45:48 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5AEjmB28631
for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 10:45:48 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA03636
for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 10:45:41 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19PkLc-00072z-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 10:43:40 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19PkLb-00072t-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 10:43:39 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5AEj7B28565;
Tue, 10 Jun 2003 10:45:07 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5AEiTB28454
for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 10:44:29 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA03564
for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 10:44:23 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19PkKL-00071h-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 10:42:21 -0400
Received: from zcars0m9.nortelnetworks.com ([47.129.242.157])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19PkKK-000718-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 10:42:20 -0400
Received: from zcard309.ca.nortel.com (zcard309.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.69])
by zcars0m9.nortelnetworks.com (Switch-2.2.6/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id h5AEhiq10015;
Tue, 10 Jun 2003 10:43:44 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by zcard309.ca.nortel.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
id ; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 10:43:44 -0400
Message-ID:
From: "Hamid Ould-Brahim"
To: Alex Zinin
Cc: Vach Kompella , l2vpn@ietf.org
Subject: RE: Updated L2VPN WG charter
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 10:43:44 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C32F5E.B10CBB3E"
Sender: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Id:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C32F5E.B10CBB3E
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Alex,
Not a major concern but how about:
"Signaling of l2vpn related information
for the purpose of setup and maintenance of
l2vpn circuits. When applicable PWE3 signaling
procedures should be used".
That pretty much reflects current reality...
Hamid.
>
> >> OK, how about "Signaling of l2vpn service parameters"?
>
> > Okay. But I am afraid the term "parameters" will be
> > interpreted as the stuff that goes after the signaling
> > info used for the purpose of connectivity (stuff like
> > optional parameters, etc)...
>
> Could you propose wording that would (to your mind) address your
> concern?
>
> Thanks.
> Alex
>
>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C32F5E.B10CBB3E
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Alex,
Not a major concern but how about:
"Signaling of l2vpn related information
for the purpose of setup and maintenance of
l2vpn circuits. When applicable PWE3
signaling
procedures should be used".
That pretty much reflects current
reality...
Hamid.
>
> >> OK, how about
"Signaling of l2vpn service parameters"?
>
> > Okay. But I am
afraid the term "parameters" will be
> > interpreted as the stuff that
goes after the signaling
> > info used for the purpose of connectivity
(stuff like
> > optional parameters, etc)...
>
>
Could you propose wording that would (to your mind) address your
>
concern?
>
> Thanks.
> Alex
>
>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C32F5E.B10CBB3E--
From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Tue Jun 10 15:17:03 2003
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged))
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA14217
for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 15:17:03 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h5AJGY718690
for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 15:16:34 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5AJGYB18687
for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 15:16:34 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA14206
for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 15:16:32 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19PoZi-0001RO-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 15:14:30 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19PoZh-0001RK-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 15:14:29 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5AJGAB18672;
Tue, 10 Jun 2003 15:16:10 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5AJFGB18641
for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 15:15:16 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA14105
for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 15:15:14 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19PoYR-0001Qx-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 15:13:11 -0400
Received: from zcars0m9.nortelnetworks.com ([47.129.242.157])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19PoYR-0001Qm-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 15:13:11 -0400
Received: from zcard309.ca.nortel.com (zcard309.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.69])
by zcars0m9.nortelnetworks.com (Switch-2.2.6/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id h5AJEYq09764;
Tue, 10 Jun 2003 15:14:34 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by zcard309.ca.nortel.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
id ; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 15:14:34 -0400
Message-ID:
From: "Hamid Ould-Brahim"
To: Alex Zinin , Loa Andersson
Cc: l2vpn , Thomas Narten
Subject: RE: Updated L2VPN WG charter
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 15:14:31 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C32F84.85524218"
Sender: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Id:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C32F84.85524218
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Alex, Loa,
>
> > Qustion: What is a limited number of solutions? Understanding that
> > it is not possible to give an exact number, there is nevertehless
> > a need to understand what the limitations are. A 100 is
> still liomited,
> > but so is 1 or 2.
>
> My opinion is that the _default_ mode for the WG should be one
> solution per item of the list below (VPLS, VPWS, IPL2VPN), each going
> to STD track. If the WG believes at some point that more than one is
> necessary, than (as usual) a strong case would need to be made wrt why
> one is not enough.
>
Not sure this is in fact accurate. The charter indicated
that the l2vpn services need to be provided across both
IP and MPLS-enabled IP network, and since a solution is described
in the charter as
"providing the framework for a specific solution,
should include info on how discovery, signaling, and encaps work
together, include security",
It results that we will end up, at least, with two solutions
for the same service...(that's another reason why I think
the charter should mention explicitly that one of desirable
goals is to maximize commonalities among solutions
(even between the IP and MPLS-based solutions).
Hamid.
(with no intent of respining the "single vs multiple solutions"
debate ;-)).
------_=_NextPart_001_01C32F84.85524218
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Alex, Loa,
>
> > Qustion: What is a limited number of
solutions? Understanding that
> > it is not possible to give an exact
number, there is nevertehless
> > a need to understand what the
limitations are. A 100 is
> still liomited,
> > but so is 1 or
2.
>
> My opinion is that the _default_ mode for the WG should be
one
> solution per item of the list below (VPLS, VPWS, IPL2VPN), each
going
> to STD track. If the WG believes at some point that more than one
is
> necessary, than (as usual) a strong case would need to be made wrt
why
> one is not enough.
>
Not sure this is in fact accurate.
The charter indicated
that the l2vpn services need to be
provided across both
IP and MPLS-enabled IP network, and
since a solution is
described
in the charter as
"providing the framework
for a
specific solution,
should
include
info on how discovery, signaling, and encaps work
together,
include
security",
It results that we will end up, at least,
with two solutions
for the same service...(that's another
reason why I think
the charter should mention explicitly that
one of desirable
goals is to maximize commonalities among solutions
(even between the IP and MPLS-based
solutions).
Hamid.
(with no intent of respining the "single vs
multiple solutions"
debate ;-)).
------_=_NextPart_001_01C32F84.85524218--
From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Tue Jun 10 16:45:11 2003
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged))
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA17144
for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 16:45:11 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h5AKiiv25278
for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 16:44:44 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5AKiiB25275
for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 16:44:44 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA17069
for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 16:44:40 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19Ppx0-0001yJ-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 16:42:38 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19Ppwz-0001yG-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 16:42:37 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5AKiOB25256;
Tue, 10 Jun 2003 16:44:24 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5AKhPB25213
for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 16:43:25 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA16974
for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 16:43:21 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19Ppvj-0001xi-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 16:41:19 -0400
Received: from kanfw1.ottawa.alcatel.ca ([192.75.23.69] helo=kanmx2.ca.alcatel.com)
by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19Ppvh-0001xc-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 16:41:17 -0400
Received: (qmail 14932 invoked from network); 10 Jun 2003 20:45:54 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO camail03.ca.alcatel.com) (138.120.105.217)
by kanmx2.ca.alcatel.com with SMTP; 10 Jun 2003 20:45:54 -0000
Received: from alcatel.com ([138.120.62.63]) by
camail03.ca.alcatel.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with
ESMTP id HGA9K500.H6D; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 16:43:17 -0400
Message-ID: <3EE642E0.F617107F@alcatel.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 16:43:12 -0400
From: "Cheng-Yin Lee"
Reply-To: Cheng-Yin.Lee@alcatel.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tony Li
CC: Jeff Learman ,
Mailing List , isis-wg@ietf.org,
Acee Lindem , l2vpn@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] Re: Inconsistent view of routers over a LAN
References:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Id:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Jeff, Tony, Acee,
Thanks for your clarification.
L2VPN WG is defining emulated LAN (and broadcast network for IP traffic)
service over IP/MPLS network and some of the mechanims being defined can
result in loss of communication among a subset of routers on the
emulated LAN (even if all the nodes in the underlying IP/MPLS transport
network are reachable).
Some of the discussions have been how tolerable are routing protocols to
this type of problem, if it is worth fixing some L2VPN WG mechanisms to
prevent this problem, how feasible are these L2VPN solutions, are these
not well-known problems ...
I hope the L2VPN WG would consider these issues and requirements in the
L2VPN solutions.
Perhaps a more detailed understanding of how things work/don't work may
help L2VPN WG develop/appreciate solutios that will work well with
routers for e.g, in case of (i) below, what would an emulated LAN user
observe in the routed network (is this predictable/unpredictable?)
Thanks
Cheng-Yin
p.s I have cced l2vpn, but pls feel free to respond only to the relevant
WG as is appropriate.
Tony Li wrote:
>
> We should also point out that in case i) things are truly broken and
> in case ii) the DR will not form an adjacency with A and the protocols
> will be able to tell that things are broken.
>
> Tony
>
> | -----Original Message-----
> | From: Jeff Learman [mailto:jlearman@cisco.com]
> | Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 9:29 AM
> | To: Cheng-Yin.Lee@alcatel.com
> | Cc: Mailing List; isis-wg@ietf.org
> | Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] Re: Inconsistent view of routers over a LAN
> |
> |
> |
> | This violates the transitivity requirement stated in ISO 10589.
> | You can't run ISIS on a subnetwork where this happens.
> | At least, that's the theory ;)
> |
> | At 11:52 AM 6/10/2003, Cheng-Yin Lee wrote:
> | >Hello,
> | >Just got some private responses, perhaps I should clarify.
> | >This is in context of an emulated LAN, and I am not
> | looking for a fix in
> | >routing protocols.
> | >
> | >Thanks
> | >Cheng-Yin
> | >
> | >Cheng-Yin Lee wrote:
> | >>
> | >> Hello,
> | >> What happens if for some reason Router A can't reach
> | Router B, but
> | >> Router C can reach A & B (and vice-versa), when Router A,B,C are
> | >> connected over a broadcast network or LAN.
> | >>
> | >> E.g. in the case for (OSPF and IS-IS) where:
> | >> i) C is the DR
> | >> ii) B is the DR
> | >>
> | >> Thanks
> | >> Cheng-Yin
> Hi Cheng-Yin,
>
> What I've recommended in the past for these situations is to force
> the routing protocol to view the underlying network as a P2MP
> (Point-to-Multi-Point) network. Many vendors support this. For
> example, in our implementation you'd simply configure:
>
> router ospf 1
> area 0
> interface backbone
> network-type point-to-multipoint
> o
> o
> < the rest of the OSPF config>
> o
>
> Good Luck,
> Acee
From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Tue Jun 10 19:04:50 2003
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged))
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA22134
for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 19:04:50 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h5AN4Ru02168
for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 19:04:27 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5AN4RB02165
for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 19:04:27 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA22108
for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 19:04:19 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19Ps8A-0002vM-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 19:02:18 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19Ps89-0002vJ-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 19:02:17 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5AN47B02115;
Tue, 10 Jun 2003 19:04:07 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5AN1sB02007
for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 19:01:54 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA22047
for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 19:01:46 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19Ps5h-0002ti-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 18:59:45 -0400
Received: from maile.telia.com ([194.22.190.16])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19Ps5g-0002tf-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 18:59:44 -0400
Received: from d1o888.telia.com (d1o888.telia.com [213.67.172.241])
by maile.telia.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h5AN1cM3006950;
Wed, 11 Jun 2003 01:01:46 +0200 (CEST)
X-Original-Recipient: l2vpn@ietf.org
Received: from pi.se (h45n1fls31o888.telia.com [213.67.172.45])
by d1o888.telia.com (8.10.2p2/8.10.1) with ESMTP id h5AN1ac05357;
Wed, 11 Jun 2003 01:01:36 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <3EE6623A.9090403@pi.se>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 00:56:58 +0200
From: Loa Andersson
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020605
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Hamid Ould-Brahim
CC: Alex Zinin , l2vpn ,
Thomas Narten
Subject: Re: Updated L2VPN WG charter
References:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Id:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hamid,
lost track of the arguments. My question and Alex answer below
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Should it be read as:
> a. one solution for IP networks
> b. another for MPLS enabled networks
> c. or a common solutions that works in both MPLS enabled
> networks and in IP networks that is not MPLS enabled
The intent is to say that the WG should aspire to "c" above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
So I guess that we all agree - default is one solution per vpws, vpls
and ipls, that works for both ip and mpls enabled ip networks.
same == maximum commonalities!
/Loa
Hamid Ould-Brahim wrote:
> Alex, Loa,
>
> >
> > > Qustion: What is a limited number of solutions? Understanding that
> > > it is not possible to give an exact number, there is nevertehless
> > > a need to understand what the limitations are. A 100 is
> > still liomited,
> > > but so is 1 or 2.
> >
> > My opinion is that the _default_ mode for the WG should be one
> > solution per item of the list below (VPLS, VPWS, IPL2VPN), each going
> > to STD track. If the WG believes at some point that more than one is
> > necessary, than (as usual) a strong case would need to be made wrt why
> > one is not enough.
> >
> Not sure this is in fact accurate. The charter indicated
> that the l2vpn services need to be provided across both
> IP and MPLS-enabled IP network, and since a solution is described
> in the charter as
>
> "providing the framework for a specific solution,
> should include info on how discovery, signaling, and encaps work
> together, include security",
>
> It results that we will end up, at least, with two solutions
> for the same service...(that's another reason why I think
> the charter should mention explicitly that one of desirable
> goals is to maximize commonalities among solutions
> (even between the IP and MPLS-based solutions).
>
> Hamid.
>
> (with no intent of respining the "single vs multiple solutions"
> debate ;-)).
>
--
/Loa
mobile + 46 739 81 21 64
email: loa@pi.se
From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Tue Jun 10 21:17:52 2003
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged))
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA25417
for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 21:17:52 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h5B1HQU11479
for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 21:17:26 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5B1HPB11476
for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 21:17:25 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA25382
for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 21:17:21 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19PuCs-0003kh-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 21:15:18 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19PuCs-0003ke-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 21:15:18 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5B1H4B11413;
Tue, 10 Jun 2003 21:17:04 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5B1GKB11390
for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 21:16:20 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA25350
for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 21:16:16 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19PuBp-0003kP-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 21:14:13 -0400
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] ident=mailnull)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19PuBo-0003kM-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 21:14:12 -0400
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] helo=127.0.0.1)
by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1)
id 19PuDk-000MCj-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Wed, 11 Jun 2003 01:16:15 +0000
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 14:42:06 -0700
From: Alex Zinin
X-Mailer: The Bat! (v1.62i) Personal
Reply-To: Alex Zinin
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Message-ID: <7713717855.20030610144206@psg.com>
To: "'l2vpn'"
Subject: Re: Updated L2VPN WG charter
In-Reply-To: <005101c32ee3$0dd877d0$6401a8c0@amer.cisco.com>
References: <005101c32ee3$0dd877d0$6401a8c0@amer.cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Id:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Tom-
>> My opinion is that the _default_ mode for the WG should be
>> one solution per item of the list below (VPLS, VPWS,
>> IPL2VPN), each going to STD track. If the WG believes at some
>> point that more than one is necessary, than (as usual) a
>> strong case would need to be made wrt why one is not enough.
> Alex,
> I like this idea in theory, but in practice, how is
> the determination of going with one over the other going to
> be made if the WG seems fairly divided? I have seen this
> handled in different ways in different WGs in the past, but
> it was never consistent. I guess we could always call in
> the VP to breat the tie or flip a coin? *)
This topic is what we (the ADs and the WG chairs) are discussing now.
There is no magic wand. However, what I can say already is:
1. If the WG is able to make the decision, we should do everything
possible to make this happen--no doubt that decisions made by
consensus are preferred over all other options.
2. I'd like us to have a clear understanding on the way forward (read
have made all necessary decisions) two weeks from Vienna the latest.
3. To make this possible, we'll start the discussion right after
the charter has been approved.
Alex
From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Wed Jun 11 18:30:59 2003
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged))
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA07327
for ; Wed, 11 Jun 2003 18:30:59 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h5BMUXn12124
for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 11 Jun 2003 18:30:33 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5BMUXm12121
for ; Wed, 11 Jun 2003 18:30:33 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA07297
for ; Wed, 11 Jun 2003 18:30:29 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19QE4v-0004jJ-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 11 Jun 2003 18:28:25 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19QE4v-0004jF-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 11 Jun 2003 18:28:25 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5BMU8m12090;
Wed, 11 Jun 2003 18:30:09 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5BMTFm12038
for ; Wed, 11 Jun 2003 18:29:15 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA07250
for ; Wed, 11 Jun 2003 18:29:10 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19QE3f-0004ih-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Wed, 11 Jun 2003 18:27:07 -0400
Received: from kanfw1.ottawa.alcatel.ca ([192.75.23.69] helo=kanmx1.ca.alcatel.com)
by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19QE3e-0004iZ-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Wed, 11 Jun 2003 18:27:06 -0400
Received: (qmail 26991 invoked from network); 11 Jun 2003 22:38:55 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO camail03.ca.alcatel.com) (138.120.105.217)
by kanmx1.ca.alcatel.com with SMTP; 11 Jun 2003 22:38:55 -0000
Received: from alcatel.com ([138.120.62.63]) by
camail03.ca.alcatel.com (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with
ESMTP id HGC94M00.5RB; Wed, 11 Jun 2003 18:29:10 -0400
Message-ID: <3EE7AD2E.B9773CEF@alcatel.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 18:29:02 -0400
From: "Cheng-Yin Lee"
Reply-To: Cheng-Yin.Lee@alcatel.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tony Li
CC: Jeff Learman ,
Mailing List , isis-wg@ietf.org,
Acee Lindem , l2vpn@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] Re: Inconsistent view of routers over a LAN
References:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Id:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Tony, Naiming,
Thanks for clarifying this further and providing suggestions.
I would agree that it's better to use point-to-point links (or OSPF's
multipoint) when there are such problems.
As known, this is not a problem in a real LAN segment or emulated LAN
segment, provided by a bridged LAN (bridging over real LAN segments) or
bridging over circuits.
As has been brought up in the OSPF/IS-IS mailing lists, it is when the
emulated LAN (broadcast network) uses an approach whereby a full-meshed
of communication is required and there is a requirement that every
communication channel is working that this becomes a problem for routing
(and for bridges too).
There have been some proposals to overcome the problems in the
full-meshed approach, e.g. disabling the emulated LAN when one or more
connectivity loss is detected or artificially partitioning the emulated
LAN, or engineer the transport network in such a way that communication
failure never/rarely happens from the perspective of the user of the
service (e.g. routers).
More protocol mechanisms (and perhaps some heuristics) may be used to
emulate a proper LAN failure, but I think it not easy to get this
working (it also raises the question, is this the only compelling way),
in particular because of race/timing issues.
Can an operator engineer a network such that the pseudo-wire or
communications never or "rarely" fail from the perspective of
routers/bridges? What is the cost and effectiveness (backup and
rerouting pseudo-wire may not be sufficient as there can be many other
reasons why communication is lost) in this case?
I hope the L2VPN WG would consider these service issues as carefully as
L2VPN discovery protocols because even the best L2VPN discovery
protocols cannot help if the L2VPN service itself does not work well
with routers and bridges.
Thanks
Cheng-Yin
Tony Li wrote:
>
> Folks,
>
> In particular, if there is a disconnect on a broadcast medium
> between two routers and neither is the DR, then the two routers
> will present a black hole between them. This problem has been
> seen before in real life and is Not Pretty.
>
> For this reason alone, I would encourage you to model any L2
> solution as a number of point-to-point links.
>
> Regards,
> Tony
Naiming Shen wrote:
>
> i don't think l2vpn wg needs to do much. when use link-state igp
> in those places, ALWAYS assume it's unreliable. just use p2p. period.
>
>
> | -----Original Message-----
> | From: Cheng-Yin Lee [mailto:Cheng-Yin.Lee@alcatel.com]
> | Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 1:43 PM
> | To: Tony Li
> | Cc: Jeff Learman; Mailing List; isis-wg@ietf.org; Acee
> | Lindem; l2vpn@ietf.org
> | Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] Re: Inconsistent view of routers over a LAN
> |
> |
> | Jeff, Tony, Acee,
> | Thanks for your clarification.
> | L2VPN WG is defining emulated LAN (and broadcast network
> | for IP traffic)
> | service over IP/MPLS network and some of the mechanims
> | being defined can
> | result in loss of communication among a subset of routers on the
> | emulated LAN (even if all the nodes in the underlying
> | IP/MPLS transport
> | network are reachable).
> | Some of the discussions have been how tolerable are
> | routing protocols to
> | this type of problem, if it is worth fixing some L2VPN WG
> | mechanisms to
> | prevent this problem, how feasible are these L2VPN
> | solutions, are these
> | not well-known problems ...
> |
> | I hope the L2VPN WG would consider these issues and
> | requirements in the
> | L2VPN solutions.
> | Perhaps a more detailed understanding of how things
> | work/don't work may
> | help L2VPN WG develop/appreciate solutios that will work well with
> | routers for e.g, in case of (i) below, what would an
> | emulated LAN user
> | observe in the routed network (is this predictable/unpredictable?)
> |
> | Thanks
> | Cheng-Yin
> | p.s I have cced l2vpn, but pls feel free to respond only
> | to the relevant
> | WG as is appropriate.
> |
> | Tony Li wrote:
> | >
> | > We should also point out that in case i) things are
> | truly broken and
> | > in case ii) the DR will not form an adjacency with A and
> | the protocols
> | > will be able to tell that things are broken.
> | >
> | > Tony
> | >
> | > | -----Original Message-----
> | > | From: Jeff Learman [mailto:jlearman@cisco.com]
> | > | Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 9:29 AM
> | > | To: Cheng-Yin.Lee@alcatel.com
> | > | Cc: Mailing List; isis-wg@ietf.org
> | > | Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] Re: Inconsistent view of
> | routers over a LAN
> | > |
> | > |
> | > |
> | > | This violates the transitivity requirement stated
> | in ISO 10589.
> | > | You can't run ISIS on a subnetwork where this happens.
> | > | At least, that's the theory ;)
> | > |
> | > | At 11:52 AM 6/10/2003, Cheng-Yin Lee wrote:
> | > | >Hello,
> | > | >Just got some private responses, perhaps I should clarify.
> | > | >This is in context of an emulated LAN, and I am not
> | > | looking for a fix in
> | > | >routing protocols.
> | > | >
> | > | >Thanks
> | > | >Cheng-Yin
> | > | >
> | > | >Cheng-Yin Lee wrote:
> | > | >>
> | > | >> Hello,
> | > | >> What happens if for some reason Router A can't reach
> | > | Router B, but
> | > | >> Router C can reach A & B (and vice-versa), when
> | Router A,B,C are
> | > | >> connected over a broadcast network or LAN.
> | > | >>
> | > | >> E.g. in the case for (OSPF and IS-IS) where:
> | > | >> i) C is the DR
> | > | >> ii) B is the DR
> | > | >>
> | > | >> Thanks
> | > | >> Cheng-Yin
> |
> |
> | > Hi Cheng-Yin,
> | >
> | > What I've recommended in the past for these situations
> | is to force
> | > the routing protocol to view the underlying network as a P2MP
> | > (Point-to-Multi-Point) network. Many vendors support this. For
> | > example, in our implementation you'd simply configure:
> | >
> | > router ospf 1
> | > area 0
> | > interface backbone
> | > network-type point-to-multipoint
> | > o
> | > o
> | > < the rest of the OSPF config>
> | > o
> | >
> | > Good Luck,
> | > Acee
> |
> _______________________________________________
> Isis-wg mailing list
> Isis-wg@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg
From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Wed Jun 11 23:16:54 2003
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged))
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA12922
for ; Wed, 11 Jun 2003 23:16:54 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h5C3GQ031176
for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 11 Jun 2003 23:16:26 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5C3GQm31171
for ; Wed, 11 Jun 2003 23:16:26 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA12893
for ; Wed, 11 Jun 2003 23:16:23 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19QIXb-0006CL-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 11 Jun 2003 23:14:19 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19QIXb-0006CI-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 11 Jun 2003 23:14:19 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5C3G5m31142;
Wed, 11 Jun 2003 23:16:05 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5ALEQB28031
for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 17:14:26 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA18224;
Tue, 10 Jun 2003 17:14:21 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19PqPj-0002Eo-00; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 17:12:19 -0400
Received: from prattle.redback.com ([155.53.12.9])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19PqPh-0002El-00; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 17:12:17 -0400
Received: from redback.com (yoo-hoo.redback.com [155.53.12.43])
by prattle.redback.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
id 78EA01498EB; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 14:14:20 -0700 (PDT)
To: Cheng-Yin.Lee@alcatel.com
Cc: Tony Li , Jeff Learman ,
Mailing List , isis-wg@ietf.org,
Acee Lindem , l2vpn@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] Re: Inconsistent view of routers over a LAN
In-reply-to: Mail from "Cheng-Yin Lee"
dated Tue, 10 Jun 2003 16:43:12 EDT
<3EE642E0.F617107F@alcatel.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 14:14:20 -0700
From: Naiming Shen
Message-Id: <20030610211420.78EA01498EB@prattle.redback.com>
Sender: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Id:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
i don't think l2vpn wg needs to do much. when use link-state igp
in those places, ALWAYS assume it's unreliable. just use p2p. period.
] Jeff, Tony, Acee,
] Thanks for your clarification.
] L2VPN WG is defining emulated LAN (and broadcast network for IP traffic)
] service over IP/MPLS network and some of the mechanims being defined can
] result in loss of communication among a subset of routers on the
] emulated LAN (even if all the nodes in the underlying IP/MPLS transport
] network are reachable).
] Some of the discussions have been how tolerable are routing protocols to
] this type of problem, if it is worth fixing some L2VPN WG mechanisms to
] prevent this problem, how feasible are these L2VPN solutions, are these
] not well-known problems ...
]
] I hope the L2VPN WG would consider these issues and requirements in the
] L2VPN solutions.
] Perhaps a more detailed understanding of how things work/don't work may
] help L2VPN WG develop/appreciate solutios that will work well with
] routers for e.g, in case of (i) below, what would an emulated LAN user
] observe in the routed network (is this predictable/unpredictable?)
]
] Thanks
] Cheng-Yin
] p.s I have cced l2vpn, but pls feel free to respond only to the relevant
] WG as is appropriate.
]
] Tony Li wrote:
] >
] > We should also point out that in case i) things are truly broken and
] > in case ii) the DR will not form an adjacency with A and the protocols
] > will be able to tell that things are broken.
] >
] > Tony
] >
] > | -----Original Message-----
] > | From: Jeff Learman [mailto:jlearman@cisco.com]
] > | Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 9:29 AM
] > | To: Cheng-Yin.Lee@alcatel.com
] > | Cc: Mailing List; isis-wg@ietf.org
] > | Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] Re: Inconsistent view of routers over a LAN
] > |
] > |
] > |
] > | This violates the transitivity requirement stated in ISO 10589.
] > | You can't run ISIS on a subnetwork where this happens.
] > | At least, that's the theory ;)
] > |
] > | At 11:52 AM 6/10/2003, Cheng-Yin Lee wrote:
] > | >Hello,
] > | >Just got some private responses, perhaps I should clarify.
] > | >This is in context of an emulated LAN, and I am not
] > | looking for a fix in
] > | >routing protocols.
] > | >
] > | >Thanks
] > | >Cheng-Yin
] > | >
] > | >Cheng-Yin Lee wrote:
] > | >>
] > | >> Hello,
] > | >> What happens if for some reason Router A can't reach
] > | Router B, but
] > | >> Router C can reach A & B (and vice-versa), when Router A,B,C are
] > | >> connected over a broadcast network or LAN.
] > | >>
] > | >> E.g. in the case for (OSPF and IS-IS) where:
] > | >> i) C is the DR
] > | >> ii) B is the DR
] > | >>
] > | >> Thanks
] > | >> Cheng-Yin
]
]
] > Hi Cheng-Yin,
] >
] > What I've recommended in the past for these situations is to force
] > the routing protocol to view the underlying network as a P2MP
] > (Point-to-Multi-Point) network. Many vendors support this. For
] > example, in our implementation you'd simply configure:
] >
] > router ospf 1
] > area 0
] > interface backbone
] > network-type point-to-multipoint
] > o
] > o
] > < the rest of the OSPF config>
] > o
] >
] > Good Luck,
] > Acee
] _______________________________________________
] Isis-wg mailing list
] Isis-wg@ietf.org
] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg
- Naiming
From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Thu Jun 12 00:06:05 2003
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged))
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA12923
for ; Wed, 11 Jun 2003 23:16:54 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h5C3GQC31177
for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 11 Jun 2003 23:16:26 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5C3GQm31169
for ; Wed, 11 Jun 2003 23:16:26 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA12890
for ; Wed, 11 Jun 2003 23:16:23 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19QIXb-0006CH-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 11 Jun 2003 23:14:19 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19QIXa-0006CE-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 11 Jun 2003 23:14:18 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5C3G6m31158;
Wed, 11 Jun 2003 23:16:06 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5ALG6B28182
for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 17:16:06 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA18300;
Tue, 10 Jun 2003 17:16:01 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19PqRL-0002G2-00; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 17:13:59 -0400
Received: from dmz2.procket.com ([65.174.124.37])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19PqRK-0002Fl-00; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 17:13:58 -0400
Received: from miata.procket.com (zeus-d-1.procket.com [65.174.124.60])
by dmz2.procket.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
id 8C4473443F; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 13:30:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from EXCHANGE0-0.na.procket.com (exchange0a.na.procket.com [10.1.7.7])
by miata.procket.com (8.12.1/8.12.1) with ESMTP id h5ALFVYB022829;
Tue, 10 Jun 2003 14:15:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Subject: RE: [Isis-wg] Re: Inconsistent view of routers over a LAN
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 14:15:31 -0700
Message-ID:
Thread-Topic: [Isis-wg] Re: Inconsistent view of routers over a LAN
Thread-Index: AcMvkPDidAYjI9EtRdCmhJaXDdRP+gAA+ppw
From: "Tony Li"
To:
Cc: "Jeff Learman" ,
"Mailing List" , ,
"Acee Lindem" ,
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by www1.ietf.org id h5ALG6B28184
Sender: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Id:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Folks,
In particular, if there is a disconnect on a broadcast medium
between two routers and neither is the DR, then the two routers
will present a black hole between them. This problem has been
seen before in real life and is Not Pretty.
For this reason alone, I would encourage you to model any L2
solution as a number of point-to-point links.
Regards,
Tony
| -----Original Message-----
| From: Cheng-Yin Lee [mailto:Cheng-Yin.Lee@alcatel.com]
| Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 1:43 PM
| To: Tony Li
| Cc: Jeff Learman; Mailing List; isis-wg@ietf.org; Acee
| Lindem; l2vpn@ietf.org
| Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] Re: Inconsistent view of routers over a LAN
|
|
| Jeff, Tony, Acee,
| Thanks for your clarification.
| L2VPN WG is defining emulated LAN (and broadcast network
| for IP traffic)
| service over IP/MPLS network and some of the mechanims
| being defined can
| result in loss of communication among a subset of routers on the
| emulated LAN (even if all the nodes in the underlying
| IP/MPLS transport
| network are reachable).
| Some of the discussions have been how tolerable are
| routing protocols to
| this type of problem, if it is worth fixing some L2VPN WG
| mechanisms to
| prevent this problem, how feasible are these L2VPN
| solutions, are these
| not well-known problems ...
|
| I hope the L2VPN WG would consider these issues and
| requirements in the
| L2VPN solutions.
| Perhaps a more detailed understanding of how things
| work/don't work may
| help L2VPN WG develop/appreciate solutios that will work well with
| routers for e.g, in case of (i) below, what would an
| emulated LAN user
| observe in the routed network (is this predictable/unpredictable?)
|
| Thanks
| Cheng-Yin
| p.s I have cced l2vpn, but pls feel free to respond only
| to the relevant
| WG as is appropriate.
|
| Tony Li wrote:
| >
| > We should also point out that in case i) things are
| truly broken and
| > in case ii) the DR will not form an adjacency with A and
| the protocols
| > will be able to tell that things are broken.
| >
| > Tony
| >
| > | -----Original Message-----
| > | From: Jeff Learman [mailto:jlearman@cisco.com]
| > | Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 9:29 AM
| > | To: Cheng-Yin.Lee@alcatel.com
| > | Cc: Mailing List; isis-wg@ietf.org
| > | Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] Re: Inconsistent view of
| routers over a LAN
| > |
| > |
| > |
| > | This violates the transitivity requirement stated
| in ISO 10589.
| > | You can't run ISIS on a subnetwork where this happens.
| > | At least, that's the theory ;)
| > |
| > | At 11:52 AM 6/10/2003, Cheng-Yin Lee wrote:
| > | >Hello,
| > | >Just got some private responses, perhaps I should clarify.
| > | >This is in context of an emulated LAN, and I am not
| > | looking for a fix in
| > | >routing protocols.
| > | >
| > | >Thanks
| > | >Cheng-Yin
| > | >
| > | >Cheng-Yin Lee wrote:
| > | >>
| > | >> Hello,
| > | >> What happens if for some reason Router A can't reach
| > | Router B, but
| > | >> Router C can reach A & B (and vice-versa), when
| Router A,B,C are
| > | >> connected over a broadcast network or LAN.
| > | >>
| > | >> E.g. in the case for (OSPF and IS-IS) where:
| > | >> i) C is the DR
| > | >> ii) B is the DR
| > | >>
| > | >> Thanks
| > | >> Cheng-Yin
|
|
| > Hi Cheng-Yin,
| >
| > What I've recommended in the past for these situations
| is to force
| > the routing protocol to view the underlying network as a P2MP
| > (Point-to-Multi-Point) network. Many vendors support this. For
| > example, in our implementation you'd simply configure:
| >
| > router ospf 1
| > area 0
| > interface backbone
| > network-type point-to-multipoint
| > o
| > o
| > < the rest of the OSPF config>
| > o
| >
| > Good Luck,
| > Acee
|
From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Thu Jun 12 08:05:22 2003
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged))
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA05467
for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:05:21 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h5CC4r513399
for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:04:53 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5CC4rm13396
for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:04:53 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA05436
for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:04:51 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19QQmz-00019g-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:02:45 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19QQmy-00019d-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:02:44 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5CC4Lm13318;
Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:04:21 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5CC39m13256
for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:03:09 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA05373
for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:03:07 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19QQlJ-000199-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:01:01 -0400
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] ident=mailnull)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19QQlI-000196-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:01:00 -0400
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] helo=127.0.0.1)
by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1)
id 19QQnG-0003go-00; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 12:03:02 +0000
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:02:46 -0400
From: Alex Zinin
X-Mailer: The Bat! (v1.62i) Personal
Reply-To: Alex Zinin
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Message-ID: <106120769917.20030612080246@psg.com>
To: "Hamid Ould-Brahim"
CC: Vach Kompella , l2vpn@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Updated L2VPN WG charter
In-Reply-To:
References:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Id:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hamid,
I'd be fine with this, though I would change
"When applicable" to "As much as possible".
I'll change the text...
--
Alex
http://www.psg.com/~zinin/
Tuesday, June 10, 2003, 10:43:44 AM, Hamid Ould-Brahim wrote:
> Alex,
> Not a major concern but how about:
> "Signaling of l2vpn related information
> for the purpose of setup and maintenance of
> l2vpn circuits. When applicable PWE3 signaling
> procedures should be used".
> That pretty much reflects current reality...
> Hamid.
>>
>> >> OK, how about "Signaling of l2vpn service parameters"?
>>
>> > Okay. But I am afraid the term "parameters" will be
>> > interpreted as the stuff that goes after the signaling
>> > info used for the purpose of connectivity (stuff like
>> > optional parameters, etc)...
>>
>> Could you propose wording that would (to your mind) address your
>> concern?
>>
>> Thanks.
>> Alex
>>
>>
From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Thu Jun 12 08:23:50 2003
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged))
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA06713
for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:23:50 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h5CCNMg15214
for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:23:22 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5CCNMm15211
for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:23:22 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA06676
for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:23:20 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19QR4s-0001XA-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:21:14 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19QR4r-0001X6-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:21:13 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5CCN3m15195;
Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:23:03 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5CCMYm15144
for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:22:34 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA06618
for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:22:32 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19QR45-0001WJ-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:20:25 -0400
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] ident=mailnull)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19QR45-0001WF-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:20:25 -0400
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] helo=127.0.0.1)
by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1)
id 19QR67-0004TC-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 12:22:31 +0000
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:22:14 -0400
From: Alex Zinin
X-Mailer: The Bat! (v1.62i) Personal
Reply-To: Alex Zinin
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Message-ID: <161121938137.20030612082214@psg.com>
To: l2vpn
Subject: L2VPN charter rev 02 (final?)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Id:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Folks
Links to the updated charter and diff below.
http://psg.com/~zinin/ietf/ppvpn/l2vpn-02.txt
http://psg.com/~zinin/ietf/ppvpn/l2vpn-diff-01-02.html
For those not on-line, the text of the charter inserted.
I am taking this to the IESG telechat today, and hoping
this is the final rev.
--
Alex
Layer 2 Virtual Private Networks (l2vpn)
Chairs:
Area Director(s):
Thomas Narten
Erik Nordmark
Area Advisor:
Thomas Narten
Technical Advisor:
Alex Zinin
Russ Housley
Mailing Lists:
General Discussion: l2vpn@ietf.org
To Subscribe: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l2vpn
Archive: https://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/l2vpn/current/maillist.html
Description of Working Group:
Alex is the routing advisor.
Russ is the security advisor.
This working group is responsible for defining and specifying a
limited number of solutions for supporting provider-provisioned
layer-2 virtual private networks (L2VPNs).
The WG is responsible for standardization of the following solutions:
1. Virtual Private LAN Service--L2 service that emulates LAN
across an IP and an MPLS-enabled IP network, allowing standard
Ethernet devices communicate with each other as if they were
connected to a common LAN segment.
2. Virtual Private Wire Service--L2 service that provides L2
point-to-point connectivity (e.g. Frame Relay DLCI, ATM VPI/VCI,
point-to-point Ethernet) across an IP and an MPLS-enabled IP network.
3. IP-only L2 VPNs--L2 service across an IP and an MPLS-enabled
IP network, allowing standard IP devices to communicate with each
other as if they were connected to a common LAN segment or a point-
to-point circuit.
The WG will address intra-AS scenarios only at this point (other
scenarios will be considered for inclusion in the updated charter when
the current one is completed.)
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.
As a specific example, this WG will not define new encapsulation
mechanism, but will use those defined in the PWE3 WG.
L2VPN WG will review proposed protocol extensions for L2VPNs before
they are recommended to appropriate protocol-specific WGs.
The WG will work on the following items. Adding new work items
will require rechartering.
1. Discovery of PEs participating in L2 service, and
topology of required connectivity
2. Signaling of l2vpn related information for the purpose of
setup and maintenance of l2vpn circuits. As much as possible
PWE3 signaling procedures should be used
3. Solution documents (providing the framework for a specific
solution, should include info on how discovery, signaling,
and encaps work together, include security, AS as a separate
document)
4. MIBs
5. L2VPN-specific OAM extensions--extensions to existing OAM
solutions for VPLS, VPWS, and IP-only L2VPNs.
6. Interworking of IP devices connected to an IP-only L2 VPN using
dissimilar attachment circuits. This topic will be explored only
after the basic L2VPN services (VPWS, VPLS, and IP L2VPN) are
defined.
Where necessary, the WG will coordinate its activities with IEEE 802.1
Milestones (optimistic):
JUL 2003 Submit L2 requirements to IESG for publication as Informational RFC
JUL 2003 Submit L2 framework to IESG for publication as Informational RFC
JUL 2003 Identify VPLS and VPWS solutions for the WG
AUG 2003 Submit an I-D describing MIB for VPLS
AUG 2003 Submit an I-D describing MIB for VPWS
AUG 2003 Submit an I-D on OAM for VPLS
AUG 2003 Submit an I-D on OAM for VPWS
DEC 2003 Submit VPLS solution documents to IESG
DEC 2003 Submit VPWS solution documents to IESG
JAN 2004 Submit IP-only L2VPN solution documents to IESG
FEB 2004 Submit MIB for VPLS to IESG
FEB 2004 Submit MIB for VPWS to IESG
MAR 2004 Submit OAM for VPLS to IESG
MAR 2004 Submit OAM for VPWS to IESG
APR 2004 Submit OAM for IP L2VPN to IESG
From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Thu Jun 12 08:35:57 2003
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged))
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA07502
for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:35:57 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h5CCZSn15974
for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:35:28 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5CCZSm15971
for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:35:28 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA07497
for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:35:26 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19QRGa-0001lb-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:33:20 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19QRGa-0001lY-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:33:20 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5CCZ2m15958;
Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:35:02 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5CCYGm15916
for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:34:16 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA07452
for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:34:14 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19QRFQ-0001lE-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:32:08 -0400
Received: from zcars04f.nortelnetworks.com ([47.129.242.57])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19QRFP-0001kU-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:32:07 -0400
Received: from zcard309.ca.nortel.com (zcard309.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.69])
by zcars04f.nortelnetworks.com (Switch-2.2.6/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id h5CCXen19907;
Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:33:40 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by zcard309.ca.nortel.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
id ; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:33:40 -0400
Message-ID:
From: "Hamid Ould-Brahim"
To: Alex Zinin
Cc: Vach Kompella , l2vpn@ietf.org
Subject: RE: Updated L2VPN WG charter
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:33:39 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C330DE.DA10168A"
Sender: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Id:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C330DE.DA10168A
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Alex,
>
> I'd be fine with this, though I would change
> "When applicable" to "As much as possible".
>
> I'll change the text...
>
That would be fine with me. Thanks.
Hamid.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C330DE.DA10168A
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Alex,
>
>
I'd be fine with this, though I would change
> "When
applicable" to "As much as possible".
>
> I'll change
the text...
>
That would be fine with me.
Thanks.
Hamid.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C330DE.DA10168A--
From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Thu Jun 12 20:25:25 2003
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged))
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA02534
for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 20:25:25 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h5D0Ovd04978
for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 20:24:57 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (lists.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5D0Ovm04975
for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 20:24:57 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA02519
for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 20:24:54 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19QcL9-0007Kk-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 20:22:48 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19QcL9-0007Kg-00
for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 20:22:47 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5CNQ1a01239;
Thu, 12 Jun 2003 19:26:01 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176])
by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5CNPom01228
for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 19:25:50 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1])
by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA01277
for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 19:25:46 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1])
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19QbPx-0006wf-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 19:23:41 -0400
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] ident=mailnull)
by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12)
id 19QbPw-0006wb-00
for l2vpn@ietf.org; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 19:23:41 -0400
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] helo=127.0.0.1)
by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1)
id 19QbRc-0007Ci-00; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 23:25:46 +0000
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 19:24:57 -0400
From: Alex Zinin