Note Well

Any submission to the IETF intended by the Contributor for publication as all or part of an IETF Internet-Draft or RFC

and any statement made within the context of an IETF activity is considered an "IETF Contribution". Such statements

include oral statements in IETF sessions, as well as written and electronic communications made at any time or place,

which are addressed to:

• The IETF plenary session • The IESG, or any member thereof on behalf of the IESG • Any IETF mailing list, including the IETF list itself, any working group or design• team list, or any other list functioning under IETF auspices • Any IETF working group or portion thereof • The IAB or any member thereof on behalf of the IAB • The RFC Editor or the Internet-Drafts function

All IETF Contributions are subject to the rules of RFC 5378 and RFC 3979 (updated by RFC 4879).

Statements made outside of an IETF session, mailing list or other function, that are clearly not intended to be input to

an IETF activity, group or function, are not IETF Contributions in the context of this notice.

Please consult RFC 5378 and RFC 3979 for details.

A participant in any IETF activity is deemed to accept all IETF rules of process, as documented in Best Current

Practices RFCs and IESG Statements.

A participant in any IETF activity acknowledges that written, audio and video records of meetings may be made

and may be available to the public.

MPLS Working Group

IETF 84 – VancouverMonday, 09:00-11:30Friday, 09:00-11:00

Agenda Bashing - Admin

• Please respect the time allocated to your presentation slot.

• Fill in the Blue Sheets, and pass on. Return to WG Chairs

• https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/84/agenda/mpls/

100The MPLS working group has now produced

RFCs

WG Status• 2 New RFCs

– RFC 6639Multiprotocol Label Switching Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) MIB-Based Management Overview

– RFC 6669An Overview of the Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) Toolset for MPLS-Based Transport Networks

• RFC 6670The Reasons for Selecting a Single Solution for MPLS Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM))

RFC 6670 was not a working group document, but may be of interest and has been made accessible from the MPLS WG home page.

WG Status• WG Drafts in RFC-Editor’s queue

– draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-gtsm (EDIT)

• Document of interest in RFC-Editors queue– draft-betts-itu-oam-ach-code-point-04

(Waiting for ITU-T reference)

WG Status• Drafts in IESG Processing

– draft-ietf-mpls-tp-use-cases-and-design-02• Publication Requested

– draft-ietf-mpls-tp-security-framework-04• Publication Requested

WG Status• WG Drafts (on the agenda)

– draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-multi-topology– draft-ietf-mpls-tp-ring-protection

• Discussion of deep label stacks– Resulted from WG last call on draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-

label

WG Status• WG Drafts (not on the agenda) I

– draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label• Shepherd write-up in progress

– draft-ietf-mpls-gach-adv• WG Last call closed• Waiting for update from authors

– draft-ietf-mpls-ipv6-pw-lsp-ping• Ready for WG Last Call

– draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-dod• Security section need to be improved• Minor updates needed• Authors expect to request WG Last Call before IETF 85

– draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-ip-pw-capability

– draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-ipv6• WG Last Call closed• Waiting for updates from the authors

WG Status• WG Drafts (not on the agenda) II

– draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-mpls-tp-oam-conf• Waiting for updated version of CCAMP companion document

– draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-ttl-tlv

– draft-ietf-mpls-mldp-in-band-signaling• Ready for IESG

– draft-ietf-mpls-return-path-specified-lsp-ping• WG Last Call closed• Waiting for updates from the authors

– draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast

– draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mpls

WG Status• WG Drafts (not on the agenda) III

– draft-ietf-mpls-targeted-mldp• Recently adopted as WG document, to be published

– draft-ietf-mpls-tp-ethernet-addressing• WG Last Call closed• Waiting for updates from authors

– draft-ietf-mpls-tp-itu-t-identifiers• WG Last Call extended

– draft-ietf-mpls-tp-mip-mep-map• Working on one outstanding issue

– draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-id-mib• Recently adopted as WG document

– draft-ietf-mpls-tp-rosetta-stone• Need some work

WG Status• WG Drafts (not on the agenda) IV

– draft-ietf-mpls-tp-security-framework• Publication Requested

– draft-ietf-mpls-tp-te-mib• WG Last Call closed• New version (-04) published• Waiting for MiB Doctors to confirm the updates

– draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm• Updated. New requirements incorporated

– draft-ietf-mpls-tp-use-cases-and-design• Publication Requested

Liaison• Needed to answer to:

Revision of Recommendation ITU-T G.8131 – Linear protection switching for MPLS-TP networkshttps://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1162/

• Eric O and Yaacov W has helped the WG chairs to compile a response based on comments from several sources

• This proposed response has been reviewed on the WG mailing list. Some late comments need to be responded to or worked into the text.

• The response liaison will be sent this week

WG Status• Non WG Drafts I

– draft-ali-mpls-inter-domain-p2mp-rsvp-te-lsp• In review prior to wg doc poll• IPR call will be issued

– draft-allan-mpls-spme-smp-fmwk– draft-allan-mpls-unified-ic-req-frmwk– draft-atlas-mpls-te-express-path– draft-bashandy-mpls-ldp-bgp-frr

• MPLS or RTWGP?– draft-chen-mpls-mldp-deployment-via-p2p-tunnels

WG Status• Non WG Drafts II

– draft-chen-mpls-p2mp-egress-protection• On the agenda

– draft-chen-mpls-p2mp-ingress-protection• On the agenda

– draft-cheung-mpls-tp-mesh-protection• On hold until we have the SMP requirements

– draft-cui-mpls-tp-cc-cv-rdi-id– draft-cui-mpls-tp-on-demand-cv-id– draft-ezy-mpls-tp-1ton-protection

• Poll for adoption as working group document ends August 3rd– draft-fbb-mpls-tp-p2mp-framework

• New version published• Comments requested

WG Status• Non WG Drafts III

– draft-fuxh-mpls-delay-loss-te-framework• On the agenda

– draft-helvoort-mpls-tp-ring-protection-switching– draft-hmk-mpls-tp-p2mp-oam-framework

• On the agenda– draft-iwijnand-mpls-mldp-multi-topology– draft-jacquenet-mpls-rd-p2mp-te-requirements– draft-jin-jounay-mpls-mldp-hsmp

• Being reviewed prior to call for adoption as working group document– draft-jin-mpls-mldp-leaf-discovery

• Being reviewed prior to call for adoption as working group document

WG Status• Non WG Drafts IV

– draft-jjb-mpls-rsvp-te-hsmp-lsp• Being reviewed prior to call for adoption as working group document

– draft-kini-mpls-frr-ldp• RTGWG?

– draft-kompella-mpls-reserved-labels– draft-li-mpls-ldp-mt-mib– draft-liu-mpls-tp-interconnected-ring-protection– draft-liu-mpls-tp-p2mp-shared-protection– draft-lzj-mpls-receiver-driven-multicast-rsvp-te

• On the agenda

WG Status• Non WG Drafts V

– draft-manral-mpls-rsvpte-ipv6– draft-manral-mpls-tp-lmp-test– draft-martinotti-mpls-unified-mpls-fwk

• Comments needed.– draft-mirsky-mpls-tp-cv-adv

• To be updated• Call for wg adoption prior to IETF 85

– draft-pan-shared-mesh-protection• On hold waiting for SMP requirements

– draft-pdutta-mpls-ldp-adj-capability• On the agenda

– draft-pdutta-mpls-ldp-v2

WG Status• Non WG Drafts VI

– draft-pdutta-mpls-multi-ldp-instance• On the agenda

– draft-pdutta-mpls-tldp-hello-reduce• MPLS-RT review

– draft-pelletier-mpls-ldp-bindings-refresh– draft-raza-mpls-ldp-applicability-label-adv

• Poll to become wg document ends Aug 7th– draft-raza-mpls-ldp-olf– draft-rekhter-mpls-pim-sm-over-mldp– draft-shen-mpls-rsvp-setup-protection

WG Status• Non WG Drafts VII

– draft-smiler-mpls-tp-linear-protection-mib– draft-tao-mpls-pim-interworking

• On the agenda– draft-torvi-mpls-rsvp-ingress-protection

• On the agenda– draft-villamizar-mpls-tp-multipath– draft-villamizar-mpls-tp-multipath-te-extn– draft-weingarten-mpls-smp-requirements

• On the agenda– draft-wijnands-mpls-mldp-node-protection

• Ready for poll to become wg doc

WG Status• Non WG Drafts VIII

– draft-xu-mpls-in-udp– draft-zhao-mpls-mldp-protections– draft-zheng-mpls-ldp-hello-crypto-auth

• Poll for wg adoption ends July 31st– draft-zjns-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply

• On the agenda– draft-zlj-mpls-mrsvp-te-frr

• On the agenda• RTGWG?

The MPLS-RT• Information

– We have a lot of WG drafts, and a lot more drafts waiting to be considered for adoption as WG drafts

– To work through the backlog while maintaining quality, WG chairs started an MPLS Review Team

• Status– MPLS-RT was initially an experiment– WG chairs found it very helpful and have decided to

make it permanent.– Members chosen for experience and knowledge,

some are specialists in certain areas.

The MPLS Review Team (MPLS-RT)

MPLS-RT Charter• review drafts to support the working group chairs, e.g.

before polls on working group document status • Respond to the following questions:

– is document coherent?– is it useful?– is it likely to be actually useful in operational networks?– is technically sound?– is ready to be considered for WG adoption?

• The working group chairs may request reviews in other situations

The MPLS-RT process• RT members have indicated specific areas of

competence and interest• Chairs request reviews by specific RT members

– Others (not on the team) may be asked to review some documents due to specific expertise

• Reviews sent to authors, MPLS list– May be sent privately to chairs only– This is a new process, we have not fully debugged all

details

The MPLS-RT members• Dave Allan• Thomas Beckhaus• Mach Chen• Joan Cucchiara• Nick DelRegno• Kenji Fujihira• Eric Gray• Jia He• Lizhong Jin• Markus Jork• Daniel King• Sriganesh Kiri

• Nick Leymann• Greg Mirsky• Thomas Morin• Tom Nadeau• Eric Osborne• Kamran Raza• Raveendra Torvi• Yaacov Weingarten• Bert Wijnen• Jeremy Whittaker• Bo Wu• Vero Zheng

Miscellaneous for Authors• Please Verify email addresses in drafts.

– We quite often get bounces from the mail aliases for our drafts• Question: “Why do not all ‘mpls’ related drafts show up

on the mpls WG page?”• The rule is that the filename shall be in this format:

– draft-ietf-mpls-whatever-topic (if and only if WG document); or– draft-individual-mpls-whatever-topic (otherwise)

• Constructs that will not work: – draft-individual1-indivdual2-mpls-topic;– draft-individual-my-mpls-draft

• They are not “illegal”, but they will not show up on the mpls page!