home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
Internet Info 1997 December
/
Internet_Info_CD-ROM_Walnut_Creek_December_1997.iso
/
ietf
/
92nov
/
area.routing.92nov.txt
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1993-02-17
|
8KB
|
215 lines
Routing Area
Director(s):
o Bob Hinden: hinden@eng.sun.com
Area Summary reported by Bob Hinden/Sun
Border Gateway Working Group (BGP
The BGP Working Group agreed to make minor editorial changes to the
BGP-4 draft and reissue it with the proposed changes. The BGP-4 MIB
will be amended to remove potential conflicts with BGP-3 MIB.
The Group met with SIP/IPAE Working Group members to discuss how BGP-4
could be modified to accommodate SIP/IPAE inter-domain routing. The BGP
Working Group recommended to the SIP/IPAE Group that it is preferable to
not change BGP-4 to support SIP/IPAE routing, rather it is preferable to
explore the possibility of using IDRP to carry SIP/IPAE routing
information.
Inter-Domain Policy Routing Working Group (IDPR)
The IDPR Working Group met for two sessions on Monday. The Chair gave a
status report, describing the GATED development effort, DNS
modifications, IDPR MIB, and the scheduled Internet pilot installation.
Following the status report, the IDPR working Group focussed on the
following issues:
1. How to get a software development team assembled to enable keeping
the GATED effort going, independent of funding from individual
sponsors.
2. What IDPR issues to pursue during the next year. For example,
hierarchical addressing and host specification of source policy
will likely be requested in the near future.
3. Conduct a survey of the policy needs of the Internet community,
including the needs of transit service providers and the needs of
users, to determine how IDPR meets these project needs.
4. Multicasting in the policy routing environment. The Group has a
strawman proposal for this and intends to produce an Internet-Draft
this spring, describing the proposal.
IP Over Large Public Data Networks (IPLPDN)
The Working Group discussed a revision to RFC 1294 ``Multiprotocol over
1
Frame Relay''. The Group agreed to the following changes:
o Specification of the padding of encapsulated protocols to a two
byte address.
o Discussion of remote bridging and clarification of bridge PDU
encapsulation.
o Inclusion of connection oriented protocols in an appendix.
After an email review, the Working Group plans to submit the draft to
the IESG as a Draft Standard.
The Group discussed RFC 1356 on Multiprotocol over X.25 and agreed to
collect information on implementation experience and to then submit it
the IESG as a Draft Standard.
The ``Directed ARP'' draft was reviewed again by the Group and the their
previous plan to recommend this as a Proposed Standard was reversed.
The Working Group will recommend to the authors that it be published as
an Experimental Protocol.
Work on IP over Circuit ISDN progressed with the following decisions:
o X.25 was approved as an additional encapsulation protocol.
o Multi-link transport was added. This will also be discussed with
the PPP Extensions Working Group.
In addition, the Working Group will write an informational RFC
describing the IEEE 802.6i Draft Standard on remote bridging over SMDS.
Open Shortest Path First (OSPF)
The Working Group started a last call for four documents:
1. Updated OSPF V2 spec (backward-compatible bug fixes to RFC 1247)
2. Updated OSPF MIB
3. OSPF NSSA area option
4. OSPF Trap MIB
The Working Group expects to submit these in the next month or two for
publication as RFCs. continued discussion of a proposed
user/implementation guide for OSPF over Frame relay networks (no
protocol changes are actually required), and came to general agreement
on a strategy for gracefully dealing with OSPF database overflow.
2
Mobile IP Working Group (MOBILEIP)
The Mobile IP Working Group met twice. The first session consisted of
presentations by Pierre Dupont on current packet radio offerings from
Motorola, by Tatsuya Ohnishi on a new mobile IP proposal from
Matsushita, by Fumio Teraoka on recent changes to the Sony mobile IP
proposal, and by Charlie Perkins of IBM on a more general architecture
and terminology for mobility support in connectionless network
protocols.
The second session consisted of a talk by John Ioannidis on security and
authentication extensions to the Columbia mobile IP proposal, and
discussion of a number of new topics, including: agreement to submit
all mobile IP proposals as Internet-Drafts, identification of multicast
issues that arise with mobile hosts, the value of location-independent
``EIDs'' for supporting mobility, and the possible specification of a
general ``destination has moved'' ICMP message to reduce the incidence
of ``triangular routing'' in some mobile IP schemes.
Multicast OSPF Working Group (MOSPF)
The MOSPF Working Group decided to submit the Multicast OSPF Extensions
draft as a Proposed Standard. They also decided to submit as a Proposed
Standard a short document specifying how to map IP multicast addresses
to a Token Ring Functional Address. The Group discussed possible
designs of a multicast traceroute facility. Greg Minshall and Steve
Deering agreed to write a concrete proposal.
Source Demand Routing Protocol BOF (SDRP)
The SDRP BOF decided to form a Working Group. A Charter for the Group
was proposed, discussed and accepted. Work priorities were established
and a schedule of work was generated. SDRP's capabilities and future
goals were discussed. The mailing list will be established as
sdrp-request@caldera.usc.edu.
Virtual Circuit Routing BOF (VCROUT)
The Virtual Circuit Routing BOF meeting to discuss adapting internet
routing protocols for use in virtual circuit networks. The scope of the
vc-routing work was covered including:
o VC-routing architecture
o Protocols to implement the architecture
o Class of service
o Multicast
o Private logical networks
o Internal switch addressing
o Switch to network address (ie IP) translation.
o VC setup protocol
3
The Group concluded that the VC routing work should focus on using
existing protocols and existing standards work to the extent possible.
The BOF reviewed and discussed several items from a previous meeting
that was held at NET during INTEROP week. These included the following:
Scale The IGP should scale up to 1000 switches.
Switch Addressing The switch ID being a 32-bit address that can
either be an IP address or be mapped into an IP
address.
IGP OSPF/RMP was discussed as a possibility for the IGP.
Inter-Domain Routing IDRP may be a good choice for this solution.
Signaling Use Q.93B (ATM)/Q.933 (FR) as the base for virtual
circuit management with potentially a few
modifications. The Group will attempt to define an
inter-switch call set up protocol that will include
an option to do inter-domain and intra-domain source
route call setup.
Class Of Service Discussed the potential of 3 classes of service:
VC (PVC and SVC) Datagram ``Soft VC'' (similar to VC
but would not have the strict quality guarantees
provided by VC.)
Address Resolution There were a few issues considered that fall under
the heading of address resolution including
``network level'' address to switch/port address
resolution.
The Group decided that there was sufficient interest to form an IETF
working group to continue this work.
4