Source: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc7674/history/
Timestamp: 2020-05-28 11:58:27
Document Index: 48828059

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 2', 'art 2', 'art 3', 'art 3', 'art 2', 'art 3', 'art 2', 'art 2', 'art 3', 'art 3']

History for draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis-05
rfc7674 (2015-10-14) draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis-05 (2015-07-27) draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis-04 (2015-04-11) draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis-03 (2014-11-24) draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis-02 (2014-10-24) draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis-01 (2014-10-20) draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis-00 (2014-04-01) draft-haas-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis-01 (2014-02-05) draft-haas-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis-00 (2013-11-05)
05 (System) IANA registries were updated to include RFC7674
05 (System) Notify list changed from idr-chairs@ietf.org, mach@huawei.com, draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis@ietf.org to (None)
05 Alvaro Retana IESG state changed to Approved-announcement to be sent from Approved-announcement to be sent::Revised I-D Needed
Could you expand two acronyms in the introduction, VRF and NLRI? Thank you!
05 Brian Carpenter Request for Telechat review by GENART Completed: Ready. Reviewer: Brian Carpenter.
05 Jeffrey Haas IANA Review state changed to Version Changed - Review Needed from IANA OK - Actions Needed
05 Jeffrey Haas New version available: draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis-05.txt
04 Pearl Liang IANA Review state changed to IANA OK - Actions Needed from Version Changed - Review Needed
(IANA COMMENTS) IESG/Authors/WG Chairs:
First, in the Generic Transitive Experimental Use Extended Community Sub-Types subregistry of the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) Extended Communities regsitry located at:
the entry for value 0x08 is to be updated as follows:
Sub-Type Value: 0x08
Name: Flow spec redirect AS-2byte format.
Reference: [ RFC5575, RFC-to-be ]
Second, in the BGP Transitive Extended Community Types subregistry also in the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) Extended Communities regsitry located at:
two new community types are to be registered as follows:
Type Value: 0x81
Name: Generic Transitive Experimental Use Extended Community Part 2 (Sub-Types are defined in the "Generic Transitive Experimental Extended Community Part 2 Sub-Types" Registry)
Type Value: 0x82
Name: Generic Transitive Experimental Use Extended Community Part 3 (Sub-Types are defined in the "Generic Transitive Experimental Extended Community Part 3 Sub-Types" Registry)
Third, a new registry is to be created called the Generic Transitive Experimental Extended Community Part 2 Sub-Types registry. The registry is to be a subregistry of the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) Extended Communities regsitry located at:
The registry will contain the following note:
"This registry contains values of the second octet (the "Sub-Type" field) of an extended community when the value of the first octet (the "Type" field) is 0x81."
The registation rules for the new registry is as follows (as defined in RFC5226):
RANGE REGISTRATION PROCEDURE
0x00-0xBF First Come First Served
0xC0-0xFF IETF Review
There are initial registrations and reservation in the new registry as follows:
0x00-0x07 Unassigned
0x08 Flow spec redirect IPv4 format. [ RFC-to-be ]
0x09-0xff Unassigned
Fourth, a new registry is to be created called the Generic Transitive Experimental Extended Community Part 3 Sub-Types registry. The registry is to be a subregistry of the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) Extended Communities regsitry located at:
"This registry contains values of the second octet (the "Sub-Type" field) of an extended community when the value of the first octet (the "Type" field) is 0x82."
The registration rules for the new registry are as follows (as defined in RFC 5226):
------------------+-------------------------------------+-------------------
0x08 Flow spec redirect AS-4byte format. [RFC-to-be]
NOTE: IANA cannot reserve specific values. However, early allocation is available for some types of registrations. For more information, please see RFC 7120.
04 Brian Carpenter Request for Last Call review by GENART Completed: Ready. Reviewer: Brian Carpenter.
Subject: Last Call: <draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis-04.txt> (Clarification of the Flowspec Redirect Extended Community) to Proposed Standard
- 'Clarification of the Flowspec Redirect Extended Community'
<draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis-04.txt> as Proposed Standard
This document updates RFC 5575 (Dissemination of Flow Specification
Rules) to clarify the formatting of the the BGP Flowspec Redirect
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis/ballot/
04 Alvaro Retana Notification list changed to idr-chairs@ietf.org, mach@huawei.com, draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis@ietf.org from idr-chairs@ietf.org, mach@huawei.com
04 Alvaro Retana IESG state changed to Publication Requested from AD is watching
04 Susan Hares IETF WG state changed to Submitted to IESG for Publication from WG Consensus: Waiting for Write-Up
Write-up status: Awaiting IANA Early Review
Document status: Proposed standard
WG Chairs: John Scudder and Susan Hares
Shepherd: Mach Chen
RTR-QA ...
RTR-QA review: Nabil Bitar (ok 10/25)
IANA-QA review: (11/25/25) , but waiting for secondary review (6/24)
Security review: (4/8/2015): Alexey Melnkov (alexey.melnkov@isode.com) - OK
OPS-DIR QA review: Requested 11/25/2014- Carlos Pignataro (OK)
Gen Art final review: Brian Carpenter (4/11/2015) - Reviewed and comments addressed.
IPR Call: 8/12 - 8/19 - had WG consensus
Statement by Jeff Haas: As seen in RFC 5575, Juniper has IPR on Flowspec
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/idr/current/msg13534.html
Shepherd's review:
This document clarifies the formatting of the the BGP Flowspec
Redirect Extended Community, originally documented in RFC 5575
(Dissemination of Flow Specification Rules).
The draft intends to address a BGP Flowspec Redirect Extended
Community registry issue, it's simple and straightforward. There
are good supports from the WG to publish this document as a
Proposed Standard RFC.
The draft has been reviewed by several IDR WG experts, it also
passed the RTG QA review. All comments received so far have
Document Shepherd: Mach Chen
The Document Shepherd has reviewed the draft and raised some editoral
comments that also have been solved in the latest version. After the review,
the Document Shepherd thinks that there is no outstanding issue with the
draft and it is ready for publishment.
Statement by Jeff Haas: As seen in RFC 5575, Juniper has IPR on Flowspec.
No WG issues as seen in mail thread:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/idr/current/msg13533.html
There is good consensus from the WG.
discontent? If so, please summarizes the areas of conflict in separate
Missing Reference: 'RFC 5575' is mentioned on line 111, but not defined.
This is due to the spare space between "RFC" and "5575".
Yes, this document intends to update RFC5575 and it is listed in the
The IANA Considerations section is correct and consistent with the body
04 Alvaro Retana IETF WG state changed to In WG Last Call from Submitted to IESG for Publication
04 Alvaro Retana IESG state changed to AD is watching from Waiting for Writeup
04 Gunter Van de Velde Request for Last Call review by OPSDIR Completed: Has Nits. Reviewer: Carlos Pignataro.
04 Jeffrey Haas IANA Review state changed to Version Changed - Review Needed from IANA - Not OK
04 Jeffrey Haas New version available: draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis-04.txt
03 Susan Hares This document now replaces draft-haas-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis instead of None
03 Tero Kivinen Request for Last Call review by SECDIR Completed: Ready. Reviewer: Alexey Melnikov.
IANA has reviewed draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis-03. Authors should review the comments and/or questions below. Please report any inaccuracies and respond ...
IANA has reviewed draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis-03. Authors should review the comments and/or questions below. Please report any inaccuracies and respond to any questions as soon as possible.
IANA has several questions about some of the actions requested in the IANA Considerations section of this document.
IANA understands that, upon approval of this document, there are four actions which IANA is required to complete.
First, in the Generic Transitive Experimental Use Extended Community Sub-Types subregistry of the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) Extended Communities registry located at:
the existing registration for Type Value 0x08 will have its name updated from:
Flow spec redirect
Flow spec redirect AS-2byte format
and have the reference changed to [ RFC-to-be ].
QUESTION: This draft indicates that it updates RFC5575 according to the header information
in the draft. Is the author intended to remove the existing defining reference from
Second, in the BGP Transitive Extended Community Types subregistry also in the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) Extended Communities registry located at:
two new registrations will be added as follows:
Third, a new registry is to be created called the "Generic Transitive Experimental Use Extended Community Part 2 Sub-Types" registry.
IANA QUESTION -> Where should this new registry be located? Is it a néw registry on the IANA Matrix or is it a subregistry of an existing registry? If it is a subregistry of an existing registry, in which registry will it be contained? In the same BGP Extended Communities located at http://www.iana.org/assignments/bgp-extended-communities registry?
IANA QUESTION -> What rules should be used for maintenance of this new registry? Please refer to RFC 5226 for guidance on how to select and apply maintenance policy for a new registry.
QUESTION: What is the range for this new Part 2 Sub-Types registry?
QUESTION: Is the author intended to use the same table format as the existing sub-registry
"Generic Transitive Experimental Use Extended Community Sub-Types" which has
the following columns: Sub-Type Value, Name, Reference, and (Registration) Date?
IANA understands that there is a single initial registration in the new registry as follows:
Type Value: 0x08
Name: Flow spec redirect IPv4 format
Fourth, a new registry is to be created called the "Generic Transitive Experimental Use Extended Community Part 3 Sub-Types" registry.
IANA QUESTION -> Where should this new registry be located? Is it a néw registry on the IANA Matrix or is it a subregistry of an existing registry? If it is a subregistry of an existing registry, in which registry will it be contained?
QUESTION: What is the range for this new Part 3 Sub-Types registry?
Name: FFlow spec redirect AS-4byte format
03 Amy Vezza Shepherding AD changed to Alvaro Retana
03 Gunter Van de Velde Assignment of request for Last Call review by OPSDIR to Dan Romascanu was rejected
03 Brian Carpenter Request for Last Call review by GENART Completed: Almost Ready. Reviewer: Brian Carpenter.
03 Tero Kivinen Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Alexey Melnikov
Subject: Last Call: <draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis-03.txt> (Clarification of the Flowspec Redirect Extended Community) to Proposed Standard
<draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis-03.txt> as Proposed Standard
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis/
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis/ballot/
03 Alia Atlas Last call was requested
03 Alia Atlas Ballot approval text was generated
03 Alia Atlas Ballot writeup was generated
03 Alia Atlas To end April 8
03 Alia Atlas IESG state changed to Last Call Requested from AD Evaluation
03 Alia Atlas Last call announcement was changed
03 Alia Atlas Last call announcement was generated
03 Alia Atlas IESG state changed to AD Evaluation from Publication Requested
03 Susan Hares
IANA-QA review: (11/25/25) (No response)
OPS-DIR QA review: Requested 11/25/2014 (bo response)
Gen Art final review: Requested 11/25/2014 (no Response)
03 Susan Hares State Change Notice email list changed to idr@ietf.org, idr-chairs@tools.ietf.org, mach@huawei.com, draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis.all@tools.ietf.org
03 Susan Hares Responsible AD changed to Alia Atlas
03 Susan Hares IETF WG state changed to Submitted to IESG for Publication from WG Consensus: Waiting for Write-Up
03 Susan Hares IESG state changed to Publication Requested
03 Susan Hares IESG process started in state Publication Requested
03 Susan Hares Tags Other - see Comment Log, Doc Shepherd Follow-up Underway cleared.
03 Susan Hares Changed document writeup
03 Susan Hares Waiting for early review of IANA
03 Susan Hares Tag Doc Shepherd Follow-up Underway set.
03 Jeffrey Haas New version available: draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis-03.txt
02 Susan Hares Write-up needed to resolve nit. Pending IANA QA review.
02 Susan Hares Tag Other - see Comment Log set.
02 Susan Hares Intended Status changed to Proposed Standard from None
02 Mach Chen Changed document writeup
02 Jeffrey Haas New version available: draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis-02.txt
01 Jeffrey Haas New version available: draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis-01.txt
00 Jonathan Hardwick Request for Early review by RTGDIR Completed: Has Issues. Reviewer: Nabil Bitar.
00 Jonathan Hardwick Requested Early review by RTGDIR
00 Susan Hares Document shepherd changed to Mach Chen
00 Susan Hares Document shepherd changed to Susan Hares
00 Jeffrey Haas New version available: draft-ietf-idr-flowspec-redirect-rt-bis-00.txt