Subject: Re: [L2CP] IETF L2CP Framework and Requirements

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2006 11:31:51 +0100

Hi Sanjay,

I agree with you that there is overlap between both documents at this 
point in time. In the end, I believe this group should end up with two 
documents: one focusing on the concept and the high-level requirements 
(end to end network, network elements but not up to the detailed 
protocol level itself), and another document focusing on the protocol 
details (including detailed protocol related network element requirements).

Historically, draft-wadhwa has covered both protocol and framework 
topics which has proven to be very helpful. I agree it provides the 
required context for the BOF.

We could have waited until after the BOF to break up draft-wadhwa into 
two docs. But then again, as editors of WT-147 (the document progressed 
at the DSL Forum), we thought it would be good to jumpstart the 
framework discussion at the IETF by capturing what we have done for 
WT-147. Rather than waiting until after the BOF, we thougt it would be 
useful to make sure that IETF folks can have a look as this work before 
the BOF.

I note that there is a new section in the document we submitted that 
looks at the end to end network model, and defines the different network 
elements and functions associated with them.

I agree with you that we must work with all interested folks to progress 
both documents so that (1) overlap is minimalized and (2) consistency is 
ensured (both for intra-IETF docs as well as between the IETF and the 
DSL Forum).

Norbert, Michel, Thomas, do you guys want to add anything?

Regards,
Sven

Sanjay Wadhwa wrote:

> Sven 
>    This draft seems to be a subset and to a large extent re-iteration (some of it verbatim) of draft-wadhwa-gsmp-l2control-config.txt. While the latter contains GSMP in the name, it's content sufficiently captures the L2C concept, framework (and use cases) and mechanism/details of a protocol to implement some of the use cases. It provides enough context for the BOF, both in terms of a framework and a protocol mechanism (providing proof of concept since there are interoperable DSLAM and BNG implementations based on this protocol). While I do see it useful to break the existing ID (draft-wadhwa-gsmp-l2control-config.txt) into a framework and a protocol draft, I don't see the point of starting a parallel effort with a brand new ID (reflecting content already present in the existing draft). As far as the framework is concerned , do you see a reason why this already existing draft can not be kept in sync with DSL forum work (which is just getting underway in the form of 
> WT-147) ? 
> Post-BOF, what we do need is detailed L2C requirements per network element (BNG, access-node, and the CPE). These detailed requirements are not explicitly covered anywhere (including in the draft you announced below, even though the name suggests so). Based on the duscussions in the BOF, I suggest that interested contributors of existing DSLF and IETF documents, work togethter to come up with an ID covering the detailed requriements (to the granulairty of network elements). 
> 
> -Sanjay
>  
> 
> 
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
>>Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 6:55 AM
>>To: [email-masked]; Voigt Norbert; [email-masked]; 
>>Sven Ooghe
>>Subject: [L2CP] IETF L2CP Framework and Requirements
>>
>>
>>All,
>>
>>As some of you on this list probably know, Norbert, Michel and 
>>myself are involved in the DSL Forum work on a proposed 
>>Working Text covering the concept of Layer 2 Control in 
>>Broadband Multi-Service Architectures (WT-147). This is linked 
>>to the activities and discussions on this list.
>>
>>In preparation of the IETF BOF session, we considered it would 
>>be important that there would remain some alignment between 
>>the IETF activities and the DSL Forum discussions. This would 
>>especially hold for the IETF "Framework and Requirements" document.
>>
>>In preparation of the BOF session, we therefore prepared an 
>>IETF draft titled "Framework and Requirements or a Layer 2 
>>Control Protocol (L2CP) in Broadband Multi-Service Networks" 
>>(attached for your reference). We would like to request a slot 
>>to discuss this at the upcoming L2CP BOF session in Dallas. We 
>>believe that having such a draft ready for the BOF will be 
>>beneficial for its success.
>>
>>The document is based on what is proposed for WT-147. We need 
>>to discuss how this draft and 
>>draft-wadhwa-gsmp-l2control-configuration-0x.txt evolve in 
>>relation to each other, in order to reduce overlap to the 
>>extent possible.
>>
>>We also discussed the concerns regarding the scope of this 
>>document and proposed DSL Forum WT-147. We would like to 
>>ensure that the activities in both standards bodies remain 
>>synchronized.
>>
>>The submission deadline for first drafts was yesterday, so you 
>>should see the draft appear on the IETF exploder shortly. This 
>>deadline is before we will have had a chance to present the 
>>scope of WT-147 in the DSL Forum Architecture and Transport 
>>working group. We expect the draft should take into account 
>>the future discussions at the DSL Forum.
>>
>>Comments are welcomed.
>>
>>Best regards,
>>Sven, Norbert, Michel and Thomas
>>
>>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> L2cp mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l2cp
> 

_______________________________________________
L2cp mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l2cp

---

From: Mark Townsley <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2006 15:06:23 +0100

Anyone can publish an individual submission draft at anytime (up to the cutoff 
dates for a general meeting), and often overlapping and even competing proposals 
are sent in advance to a meeting that is at the BoF stage. This is the process 
the IETF has for providing a stable reference for everyone to look at and 
consider, and shouldn't be treated as more or less. All drafts officially expire 
after 6 months if they are not advanced anyway.

After the WG is formed, the WG will be tasked to create a single working group 
draft (i.e., draft-ietf-l2cp..) for each of its deliverables. At this time, 
input from individual submission drafts, comments on the list, etc. will be 
incorporated based on the rough consensus of the group.

- Mark