Subject: [tsv-area] Re: consensus call on liaison response to ITU-T SG 13

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 10:27:18 +0200

this liaison response looks appropriate to me

-d.

Lars Eggert <[email-masked]>
05/10/2006 12:42
 
        To:     [email-masked], [email-masked]
        cc:     Ross Callon <[email-masked]>, Scott W Brim 
<[email-masked]>, "Bill C. Fenner" <[email-masked]>, Scott 
Bradner <[email-masked]>
        Subject:        consensus call on liaison response to ITU-T SG 13

< Attachment smime.p7s removed >

Hi,

in August, the IETF Routing and Transport Areas have received a
liaison statement from ITU-T SG 13 on "Requirements for support of
stateful flow-aware transport technology in Next Generation
Networks" (https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/liaison_detail.cgi?
detail_id=253). The ITU has requested a liaison response by October 16.

During the last IESG telechat, the IESG has come to consensus on the
liaison response included below. We would like to ask the routing and
transport community for a wider consensus call on this liaison
response. Please send your comments until October 14.

Thanks,
Lars

---<snip>---

We would like to thank ITU-T SG 13 Question 4 to bring our attention
to its work on "Requirements for the Support of Stateful Flow-Aware
Transport Technology in Next Generation Networks (Y.flowreq)". We
appreciate that the ITU-T is cooperating with the IETF when their
Recommendations on Next Generation Networks involve IETF standards.

We note that although Y.1221 itself was previously fully based on
existing IETF standards, Amendment 2 to Y.1221 from November 2005 and
Y.flowreq propose significant and fundamental changes to the Internet
architecture and several of its core protocols and mechanisms. These
include new congestion control methods, new authentication and
authorization procedures, new signaling schemes and new methods for
routing and traffic security. We appreciate that you are bringing
these ideas to the IETF.

When extensions to IETF protocols are made within the IETF, the
normal IETF process includes IETF-wide expert review followed by
review and approval by the IESG. This process attempts to ensure that
extensions will conform to the applicable architectural principles
and technical criteria.

For extensions to IETF protocols proposed outside the IETF, the IESG
has recently approved [XXX not yet] draft-carpenter-protocol-
extensions [1] to be published as an RFC. This document defines
guideline procedures for cooperation between the IETF and outside
entities on the extension of IETF protocols. These guidelines are
based on successful interactions between the IETF and other SDOs,
including ITU-T, in diverse technical areas including IPv6, MPLS,
GMPLS, NSIS, RSVP, and SIP.

We recommend that these guidelines form the basis for the cooperation
between the IETF and ITU-T with regards to Y.flowreq and invite those
promoting flow-state-aware forwarding to bring their ideas to the
IETF in the form of Internet Drafts and perhaps presentations, so
that they can be discussed by the full body of experts in the areas
it covers. We are pleased that some proponents of flow-state-aware
forwarding have asked about the possibility of discussing the ideas
at the next IETF meeting. We encourage them to come and participate.

[1] S. Bradner, B. Carpenter and T. Narten. Procedures for protocol
extensions and variations. Internet Draft draft-carpenter-protocol-
extensions (Work in Progress), September 2006.
--
Lars Eggert                                     NEC Network Laboratories

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