Subject: Proposal for moving CE and VR drafts forward

From: Mark Townsley <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 17:54:16 +0200

As part of L3VPN's recharter, I would like to admit that the group has 
lost interest in working on VR and CE based L3VPN solutions and remove 
these work items. We still have a lot of drafts that have been sitting 
around in one stuck state or another. Here is a review of what I know 
about each document, and a proposal for moving forward. I've tried to 
make it as painless as possible, but if I don't get help here I will 
have little choice but to move most of these documents to the "Dead" 
state, and stop pretending that someone is willing to work on them.

CE or VR drafts waiting on an "External Party"

draft-ietf-l3vpn-bgpvpn-auto-07.txt 
<http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-l3vpn-bgpvpn-auto-07.txt>
Part of VR series, currently waiting on as-vr document.

draft-ietf-l3vpn-vpn-vr (Informational) 
<http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-l3vpn-vpn-vr-03.txt>
Part of VR Series, currently waiting on as-vr document.

draft-ietf-l3vpn-ce-based (Informational) 
<http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-l3vpn-ce-based-03.txt>
Blocked by draft-declercq,  whose status is unclear.

CE or VR drafts in "Revised ID Needed"

draft-declercq-l3vpn-ce-based-as (Informational) 
<http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-declercq-l3vpn-ce-based-as-00.txt>
Status Unclear. Requested status update from chairs on 03/2006 (I 
honestly may have lost the response, I had an email crash at the time). 
There were some past mistakes entered in the tracker here, comments 
being entered for the wrong drafts, etc. In short, to memory, this draft 
has been subject to administrative foulups, but that doesn't change the 
fact that I need to know if there are outstanding known issues that need 
to be resolved.

draft-ietf-l3vpn-as-vr (Informational) 
<http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-l3vpn-as-vr-01.txt>
Part of VR Series. Notes tell me that this is waiting on an update from 
Anath. Tracker has information Ross asked draft to be updated with back 
in 04/2005.

draft-ietf-l3vpn-vr-mib (Proposed Standard) 
<http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-l3vpn-vr-mib-04.txt>
Need new version addressing MIB Dr. Comments. Elwin Eliazer recently 
sent email stating that he could work on this. MIB Dr. comments may be 
found here:

http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/l3vpn/current/msg01373.html

What I propose for moving forward here:
---------------------------------------------------

1. Anath or someone needs to update as-vr, or tell me definitely that it 
will never happen. This is the only document currently blocking 
bgpvpn-auto as well as vpn-vr. Once this document update is resolved, I 
will IETF LC these documents, mentioning that work on VR L3VPNs are no 
longer being pursued by the IETF, and that these documents are being 
published as informational for historical record.

2. Elwin recently offered to help on the vr-mib document. Elwin, please 
take this as a serious request to turn this document around quickly by 
addressing the outstanding MIB Dr. comments.

3. I need someone to help me with the status of draft-declercq, or at 
least to review it and tell me that it is OK. If it is ready to go to 
IETF LC, it will also unblock l3vpn-ce-based, and I will issue a similar 
IETF LC to #1.

Thanks,

- Mark

---

From: Jeremy De Clercq <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 18:17:17 +0200

> IETF LC, it will also unblock l3vpn-ce-based, and I will issue a similar 

As far as I know the status is the following:
- draft-declercq-l3vpn-ce-based-as-00.txt incorporates comments from the 
working group (it's not really a -00 version, there have been previous 
draft-declercq-*ppvpn*- versions)
- it has been WG last called
- a revision has been requested based on comments issued during AD 
evaluation
- I pointed out that (at that time), the comments were related to 
another non-related draft. So I haven't revised the document.

I'm still willing to update these documents if there are comments.

Jeremy.

---

From: "Ananth Nagarajan" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 01:28:08 +0800

Mark,

[snipped]

>Anath. Tracker has information Ross asked draft to be updated 

Sorry about this.  We've been going back and forth among the co-authors
on who will update the draft, and looks like the token is back on me as
of last month.  

I will update the draft ASAP.

[snipped]

Ananth

---

From: Mark Townsley <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 10:54:11 +0200

Thanks, Jeremy. I reviewed the document and issued an IETF Last Call 
(collectively with draft-ietf-l3vpn-ce-based-03.txt). Review comments 
still welcome from others.

- Mark

Jeremy De Clercq wrote:
>> IETF LC, it will also unblock l3vpn-ce-based, and I will issue a 
>> similar IETF LC to #1.
>
> - draft-declercq-l3vpn-ce-based-as-00.txt incorporates comments from 
> the working group (it's not really a -00 version, there have been 
> previous draft-declercq-*ppvpn*- versions)