Subject: [Idr] writeup for draft-ooms-v6ops-bgp-tunnel-06.txt

From: Yakov Rekhter <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2006 10:27:50 -0800

Bill,

Attached is my writeup for draft-ooms-v6ops-bgp-tunnel-06.txt.

Yakov.
- -----------------------------------------------------------------
1. Have the chairs personally reviewed this version of the Internet
Draft (ID), and in particular, do they believe this ID is ready to
forward to the IESG for publication?

Yes, the chair believes that this ID is ready for publication.

2. Has the document had adequate review from both key WG members
and key non-WG members? Do you have any concerns about the depth
or breadth of the reviews that have been performed?

This document passed the IDR WG Last Call, although we received no
comments on the document during the Last Call.

I am not aware whether it was reviewed by the v6ops WG. If the
document has not been reviewed by the v6ops WG, then it may be
useful to arrange such a review.

3. Do you have concerns that the document needs more review from a
particular (broader) perspective (e.g., security, operational
complexity, someone familiar with AAA, etc.)?

No, other than review from the v6ops WG.

4. Do you have any specific concerns/issues with this document that
you believe the ADs and/or IESG should be aware of? For example,
perhaps you are uncomfortable with certain parts of the document,
or have concerns whether there really is a need for it. In any
event, if your issues have been discussed in the WG and the WG has
indicated it that it still wishes to advance the document, detail
those concerns in the write-up.

I have no concerns with this document.

5. How solid is the WG consensus behind this document? Does it
represent the strong concurrence of a few individuals, with others
being silent, or does the WG as a whole understand and agree with
it?

There were no objections to this document within the IDR WG during
the IDR WG Last Call.

6. Has anyone threatened an appeal or otherwise indicated extreme
discontent? If so, please summarise the areas of conflict in separate
email to the Responsible Area Director.

No threat of an appeal.

7. Have the chairs verified that the document adheres to all of the 
ID Checklist items ? 

Yes.

8. Is the document split into normative and informative references?
Are there normative references to IDs, where the IDs are not also
ready for advancement or are otherwise in an unclear state? (note
here that the RFC editor will not publish an RFC with normative
references to IDs, it will delay publication until all such IDs are
also ready for publication as RFCs.)

The document is split into normative and informative references.
There are no normative references to IDs.

9. What is the intended status of the document? (e.g., Proposed Standard, 
Informational?) 

Proposed Standard.

10.  For Standards Track and BCP documents, the IESG approval announcement 
includes a write-up section with the following sections: 

Technical Summary 

This document explains how to interconnect IPv6 islands over a
Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS)-enabled IPv4 cloud. This
approach relies on IPv6 Provider Edge routers (6PE) which are Dual
Stack in order to connect to IPv6 islands and to the MPLS core which
is only required to run IPv4 MPLS. The 6PE routers exchange the IPv6
reachability information transparently over the core using the
Multi-Protocol Border Gateway Protocol (MP-BGP) over IPv4. In doing
so, the BGP Next Hop field is used to convey the IPv4 address of the
6PE router so that dynamically established IPv4-signaled MPLS Label
Switched Paths (LSPs) can be used without explicit tunnel
configuration.

Working Group Summary 

This is an individual submission. There has been no comments on 
the document during the Last Call.

Protocol Quality 

While this is an individual submission, there are multiple
implementations of this specification. Specifically there are two
implementations by the router vendors, and three implementations
by the network test equipment vendors. The full implementation
report is available (see draft-levy-idr-6pe-survey-00.txt).

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

---

From: Bill Fenner <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2006 07:42:45 -0800

Thanks, Yakov.  I'll check with David regarding v6ops and then
advance this.

  Bill