Re: Link-State Routing WG charter

Alia,

I think that this merger is long overdue, and hopefully it will help new 
features to be written in an aligned way.

I think the remit to perform general maintenance should slightly 
clarified since the way the charter is written they look like they are 
at a lower priority than the enumerated list.

I would have thought that "LSR can coordinate with CCAMP and BIER on 
their extensions " should have been more directive.

- Stewart

On 24/01/2018 17:18, Alia Atlas wrote:
> Here is the proposed charter for the LSR working group
> that will be created from the SPF and ISIS working groups.
>
> This is scheduled for internal review for the IESG telechat on February 8.
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-lsr/
>
> The Link-State Routing (LSR) Working Group is chartered to document 
> current protocol implementation practices and improvements, protocol 
> usage scenarios, maintenance and extensions of link-state routing 
> interior gateway protocols (IGPs) with a focus on IS-IS, OSPFv2, and 
> OSPFv3.  The LSR Working Group is formed by merging the isis and ospf 
> WGs and will take on all their existing adopted work at the time of 
> chartering.
>
> IS-IS is an IGP specified and standardized by ISO through ISO 
> 10589:2002 and additional RFC standards with extensions to support IP 
> that has been deployed in the Internet for decades.  For the IS-IS 
> protocol, LSR’s work is focused on IP routing, currently based on the 
> agreement in RFC 3563 with ISO/JTC1/SC6. The LSR WG will interact with 
> other standards bodies that have responsible for standardizing IS-IS.
>
> OSPFv2 [RFC 2328 and extensions], is an IGP that has been deployed in 
> the Internet for decades. OSPFv3 [RFC5340 and extensions] provides 
> OSPF for IPv6 and IPv4 [RFC5838] which can be delivered over IPv6 or 
> IPv4 [RFC 7949].
>
> The LSR Working Group will generally manage its specific work items by 
> milestones agreed with the responsible Area Director.
>
> The following topics are expected to be an initial focus:
> 1) Improving OSPF support for IPv6 and extensions using OSPFv3 LSA 
> Extendibility.
> 2) Extensions needed for Segment Routing and associated architectural 
> changes
> 3) YANG models for IS-IS, OSPFv2, and OSPFv3 and extensions
> 4) Extensions for source-destination routing 
> [draft-ietf-rtgwg-dst-src-routing]
> 5) Potentially, extensions to better support specific network 
> topologies such as
> ones commonly used in data centers.
>
> The Link-State Routing (LSR) Working Group will coordinate with other 
> working groups, such as RTGWG, SPRING, MPLS, TEAS, V6OPS, and 6MAN, to 
> understand the need for extensions and to confirm that the planned 
> work meets the needs.  LSR can coordinate with CCAMP and BIER on their 
> extensions to the LSR IGPs as useful.  LSR may coordinate with other 
> WGs as needed.
>
> Regards,
> Alia
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Isis-wg mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg

_______________________________________________
Isis-wg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg