Subject: [trill] draft-ietf-trill-channel-tunnel-01.txt proposed change

From: Donald Eastlake <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2014 14:13:28 -0500

Hi,

As I mentioned at the TRILL WG meeting in
November, draft-ietf-trill-channel-tunnel currently covers three separately
optional extensions to the RBridge Channel facility [RFC7178]. These three
are: (1) a general set of payload types, (2) security, and (3) "scope". As
the draft is written, you could implement any one, two. or all three of
these although there is one default payload type (a nested RBridge Channel
message) that is mandatory. Of course you could also implement none of
this, since it is all optional. (Scope has to do with things like providing
a default way to send RBridge channel messages between end stations and
TRILL switches that are not on the same link.)

The security extension and the default payload type are needed to provide
security for pull directories
[draft-ietf-trill-directory-assist-mechanisms] but there is no current
requirement for the "scope" feature. I think including scope in this draft
unduly complicates it and will make it less likely to be implemented. So,
as the primary author of this draft, I plan to remove the "scope" feature.
It could always be added later through another document.

Thanks,
Donald
=============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
 [email-masked]