Subject: Fwd: WG Review: Recharter of Softwires (softwire)

From: Benjamin Niven-Jenkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 00:03:19 +0000

Colleagues,

FYI the SOFTWIRE WG is rechartering and the new charter explicitly mentions seeking review from L3VPN on proposed work around mesh softwire topologies. If you have any comments on the proposed charter or its scope please send them to the IESG mailing list as per the instructions below.

Ben

Begin forwarded message:

> From: IESG Secretary <[email-masked]>
> Date: 21 March 2011 21:29:44 GMT
> To: IETF Announcement list <[email-masked]>
> Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
> Subject: WG Review: Recharter of Softwires (softwire) 
> Reply-To: [email-masked]
> 
> A modified charter has been submitted for the Softwires (softwire)
> working group in the Internet Area of the IETF.  The IESG has not made any
> determination as yet.  The modified charter is provided below for
> informational purposes only.  Please send your comments to the IESG
> mailing list ([email-masked]) by Tuesday, March 29, 2011.
> 
> Softwires (softwire)
> ---------------------------------------------------
> Current Status: Active Working Group
> 
> Chairs:
>     Alain Durand <[email-masked]>
>     Yong Cui <[email-masked]>
> 
> Internet Area Directors:
>     Ralph Droms <[email-masked]>
>     Jari Arkko <[email-masked]>
> 
> Internet Area Advisor:
>     Ralph Droms <[email-masked]>
> 
> Mailing Lists:
>     General Discussion: [email-masked]
>     To Subscribe:       [email-masked]
>     Archive:           
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/softwires/current/maillist.html
> 
> Description of Working Group:
> 
>  The Softwires Working Group is specifying the standardization of
>  discovery, control and encapsulation methods for connecting IPv4
>  networks across IPv6 networks and IPv6 networks across IPv4 networks
>  in a way that will encourage multiple, inter-operable
>  implementations.
> 
>  For various reasons, native IPv4 and/or IPv6 transport may not be
>  available in all cases, and there is a need to tunnel IPv4 in IPv6
>  or IPv6 in IPv4 to cross a part of the network which is not IPv4 or
>  IPv6 capable. The Softwire Problem Statement, RFC 4925, identifies
>  two distinct topological scenarios that the WG will provide
>  solutions for: "Hubs and Spokes" and "Mesh." In the former case,
>  hosts or "stub" networks are attached via individual,
>  point-to-point, IPv4 over IPv6 or IPv6 over IPv4 softwires to a
>  centralized Softwire Concentrator. In the latter case (Mesh),
>  network islands of one Address Family (IPv4 or IPv6) are connected
>  over a network of another Address Family via point to multi-point
>  softwires among Address family Border Routers (AFBRs).
> 
>  The WG will reuse existing technologies as much as possible and only
>  when necessary, create additional protocol building blocks.
> 
>  For generality, all base Softwires encapsulation mechanisms should
>  support all combinations of IP versions over one other (IPv4 over
>  IPv6, IPv6 over IPv4, IPv4 over IPv4, IPv6 over IPv6). IPv4 to IPv6
>  translation mechanisms (NAT-PT), new addressing schemes, and block
>  address assignments are out of scope. DHCP options developed in this
>  working group will be reviewed jointly with the DHC WG.  RADIUS
>  attributes developed in this working group will be reviewed jointly
>  with the RADEXT WG.  The MIB Doctors directorate will be asked to
>  review any MIB modules developed in the SOFTWIRE working group.  BGP
>  and other routing and signaling protocols developed in this group
>  will be reviewed jointly with the proper working groups and other
>  workings that may take interest (e.g. IDR, L3VPN, PIM, LDP, SAAG,
>  etc).
> 
>  The specific work areas for this working group are:
> 
>  1. Developments for Mesh softwires topology; the Mesh topology work
>     will be reviewed in the l3vpn and idr WGs
>     - multicast
>     - MIB module
> 
>  2. Developments for 6rd:
>     - multicast
>     - operational specification
>     - RADIUS option for 6rd server
>     - MIB module
> 
>  3. Developments for Dual-Stack Lite (DS-Lite):
>     - multicast
>     - operational specification
>     - RADIUS option for AFTR
>     - proxy extensions; GI-DS-Lite; DS-Lite with no NAT or NAT on the
>       B4 element
>     - MIB module
> 
>  4. Finalize discovery and configuration mechanisms for a gateway to
>     use DS-Lite or 6rd; these discovery and configuration mechanisms
>     must take into a account other operating environments such as
>     dual-stack and tunneling mechanisms not defined by the softwire
>     WG.  Development of new mechanisms will involve the dhc and/or
>     v6ops WGs as appropriate
> 
> Other work items would require WG approval and rechartering.
> 
> Goals and Milestones:
> Apr 2011 Submit DS-lite RADIUS option for Proposed Standard
> Apr 2011 Adopt DS-lite operational document as WG document
> Jul 2011 Submit 6rd RADIUS option for Proposed Standard
> Jul 2011 Submit GI DS-lite for Proposed Standard
> Jul 2011 Adopt B4NAT as WG document
> Aug 2011 Adopt 6rd operational document as WG document
> Aug 2011 Adopt Multicast extensions document as WG document
> Aug 2011 Submit DS-lite operational document for Informational
> Sep 2011 Submit B4NAT for Informational
> Nov 2011 Submit Multicast extensions document for Informational
> Nov 2011 Submit 6rd operational document for Informational
> Nov 2011 Adopt 6rd MIB module as WG document
> Nov 2011 Adopt DS-lite MIB module as WG document
> Nov 2011 Adopt Mesh topology MIB module as WG document
> Nov 2012 Submit 6rd MIB module for Proposed Standard
> Nov 2012 Submit DS-lite MIB module for Proposed Standard
> Nov 2012 Submit Mesh topology MIB module for Proposed Standard
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> IETF-Announce mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce