Re: draft-morin-l3vpn-mvpn-considerations-01

["Adrian Farrel" <adrian at olddog.co.uk>]

Hi Ben,

This draft is shaping up well, I think and will (hopefully) give the 
intended guidance.

Although security issues are mentioned in a few places in the I-D, I think 
it would be helpful to pull them together and give them a little more 
attention in the Security Considerations section. Based on the security 
requirements from RFC4834 (sections 5.1.5 and 5.2.8) what basic security 
building blocks are required? Which of the options can provide the right 
level of security, and which will struggle?

Note that this might mean moving the "Summary of recommendations" section to 
after the "Security considerations" section. The alternative is to give 
security its own subsection of section 3.

Its difficult for me to say, as I don't run a network, but I would also have 
expected more focus on manageability. Again, there are some references to 
OAM and a few to various management tasks, but I don't see an overall view 
of what the management functional building blocks are and which solutions 
can provide them. Also a possible subsection of section 3?

I know it would be more helpful if I actually wrote some text for you, but 
you can't have everything in life, can you?

Cheers,
Adrian

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <benjamin.niven-jenkins at bt.com>
To: <l3vpn at ietf.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 10:19 AM
Subject: draft-morin-l3vpn-mvpn-considerations-01


Colleagues,

For your information we have posted a new version of
draft-morin-l3vpn-mvpn-considerations to the I-D repository, see below
for the abstract.

This version updates the -00 version with an expanded section on
Inter-AS and a section discussing co-located RPs along with several
minor updates & corrections.

The authors would welcome any comments or feedback on the draft.

Abstract:
The current proposal for multicast in BGP/MPLS includes multiple
alternative mechanisms for some of the required building blocks of the
solution.  The aim of this document is to leverage previously documented
requirements to identify the key elements and help move forward solution
design, toward the definition of a standard having a well defined set of
mandatory procedures.  The different proposed alternative mechanisms are
examined in the light of requirements identified for multicast in
L3VPNs, and suggestions are made about which of these mechanisms
standardization should favor.  Issues related to existing deployments of
early implementations are also addressed.

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-morin-l3vpn-mvpn-consideration
s-01.txt


Ben

--
Ben Niven-Jenkins
Technical Consultant - Network Architecture, BT

E-mail: benjamin.niven-jenkins at bt.com
Office: +44 (0)1473 648225
Mobile: +44 (0)7918 077205
  Fax: +44 (0)1332 578827