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

[<benjamin.niven-jenkins at bt.com>]

Adrian Farrel <mailto:adrian at olddog.co.uk> wrote:
> Hi Ben,
> 
> This draft is shaping up well, I think and will (hopefully)
> give the intended guidance.

Adrian, thanks for the comments.

Personally my motivation (I wouldn't like to speak for my co-authors)
for the draft is to try and influence draft-ietf-l3vpn-2547bis-mcast so
that it mandates a base set of mandatory options in order to aid
interoperability (as it stands two implementations could claim
conformance while implementing completely different options).  Therefore
I see draft-morin as transitory.  As draft-ietf-l3vpn-2547bis-mcast does
not discuss security or management neither does draft-morin.

However, the areas you highlight are important in a more general sense
and I will discuss them with my co-authors for possible inclusion in a
future version of the draft.

Thanks
Ben

> 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-con
> sideration s-01.txt 
> 
> 
> Ben