Subject: New Liaison Statement, "Re-review of ASON Routing Requirements"

From: Adrian Farrel (IETF CCAMP WG) <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2007 06:00:09 -0400

Title: Re-review of ASON Routing Requirements
Submission Date: 2007-08-05
URL of the IETF Web page: https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/liaison_detail.cgi?detail_id=356 
Please reply by 2008-02-27

From: Adrian Farrel(IETF CCAMP WG) <[email-masked]>
To: ITU-T SG15([email-masked])
Cc: Stephen Trowbridge <[email-masked]>
Kam Lam <[email-masked]>
Scott Bradner <[email-masked]>
Ross Callon <[email-masked]>
Dave Ward <[email-masked]>
Deborah Brungard <[email-masked]>
CCAMP Mailing List <[email-masked]>
Reponse Contact: Adrian Farrel <[email-masked]>
Deborah Brungard <[email-masked]>
Technical Contact: Adrian Farrel <[email-masked]>
Deborah Brungard <[email-masked]>
Purpose: For comment 
Body: The IETF CCAMP working group has become aware from the chair
of ITU-T Study Group 15 Working Party 3 that there are 
concerns within ITU-T Study Group 15 regarding the 
correlation of the IETF RFCs and corresponding ITU 
Recommendations.

The specific RFCs in question are:

RFC 4258
Requirements for Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
(GMPLS) Routing for the Automatically Switched Optical 
Network (ASON)
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4258.txt

RFC 4652
Evaluation of Existing Routing Protocols against Automatic
Switched Optical Network (ASON) Routing Requirements
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4652.txt

We believe that there may have been some developments in the
ITU-T Recommendations since the completion of the RFCs 
(especially G.7715, G.7715.1, G.7715.2, and G.8080) that may
result in desired updates to the RFCs. We also understand 
that there may be some long-standing concerns about some 
technical details in the RFCs.

In the former case we would welcome pointers to the relevant
sections in the Recommendations, and your analysis of what 
we should do with the referenced material. Specifically, 
what changes you believe are necessary to the RFCs, and
in which sections those changes should be applied.

In the latter case we would appreciate a restatement of the
concerns. Given the previous attempts to ensure correlation
between the work of the IETF and ITU-T, we suggest that it
may be advantageous to present these concerns in new words,
and providing as much technical detail as possible.

Many thanks for your consideration of this issue.

Adrian Farrel and Deborah Brungard
IETF CCAMP Working Group Co-Chairs
Attachment(s):
No document has been attached