idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-homenet-routing-consensus-call-01.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The document seems to lack an Introduction section. ** The abstract seems to contain references ([RFC7368], [RFC6126]), which it shouldn't. Please replace those with straight textual mentions of the documents in question. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (January 21, 2016) is 3011 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Informational ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 6126 (Obsoleted by RFC 8966) -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 7557 (Obsoleted by RFC 8966) == Outdated reference: A later version (-03) exists of draft-boutier-babel-source-specific-01 Summary: 2 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 2 warnings (==), 3 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Homenet Working Group R. Bellis 3 Internet-Draft ISC 4 Intended status: Informational W. Townsley 5 Expires: July 24, 2016 Cisco 6 January 21, 2016 8 Homenet Routing Consensus Call 9 draft-ietf-homenet-routing-consensus-call-01 11 Abstract 13 In order to support arbitrary network topologies and multi-homing the 14 IETF Homenet Architecture [RFC7368] requires that a routing protocol 15 operates inside each home network. For interoperability reasons it 16 is necessary for there be a single "mandatory to implement" routing 17 protocol. With the Homenet Working Group unable to reach clear 18 consensus on which protocol that should be the Working Group Chairs 19 (with the support of the Internet Area Director) declared rough 20 consensus that the chosen protocol is BABEL [RFC6126]. This document 21 (not intended for publication as an RFC) serves as an additional 22 record of that decision. 24 Status of This Memo 26 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 27 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 29 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 30 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 31 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 32 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 34 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 35 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 36 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 37 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 39 This Internet-Draft will expire on July 24, 2016. 41 Copyright Notice 43 Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 44 document authors. All rights reserved. 46 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 47 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 48 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 49 publication of this document. Please review these documents 50 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 51 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 52 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 53 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 54 described in the Simplified BSD License. 56 Table of Contents 58 1. Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 59 2. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 60 3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 61 4. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 62 5. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 63 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 65 1. Statement 67 On the 27th of October, 2015, the Working Group Chairs and the 68 Internet Area Director made the following statement to the Homenet 69 Mailing List: 71 The Chairs believe that there is WG consensus that a single 72 "mandatory to implement" routing protocol must be chosen. We also 73 believe that further delaying the direction here has long passed 74 the point of diminishing returns. 76 Based on the feedback received in Prague and on the WG mailing 77 list thereafter, we are therefore declaring rough consensus that 78 BABEL [RFC6126] shall be the "mandatory to implement" routing 79 protocol for Homenet routers, albeit only on an Experimental basis 80 at this time. 82 The aim in making this decision is to allow the non-routing- 83 protocol aspects of Homenet to move forward in the near term, 84 while allowing time for additional implementation, experimentation 85 and specification. To that end, we solicit Experimental Internet 86 Drafts to document Homenet-specific profiles of any applicable 87 routing solution and to report results of any relevant 88 experimentation and implementation. 90 We expect that this decision will be revisited in a future 91 Standards Track document based on specifications and running code 92 available at that time. 94 Vendors looking to ship Homenet routers in the near term should 95 refer to [RFC6126], [RFC7557], 96 [I-D.boutier-babel-source-specific], and available open source 97 implementations thereof for the routing protocol portion of the 98 Homenet solution space. 100 2. IANA Considerations 102 This document has no IANA considerations. 104 3. Security Considerations 106 This document has no security considerations. 108 4. Acknowledgements 110 We wish to thank Terry Manderson (INT Area AD) for his support. 112 5. Informative References 114 [RFC7368] Chown, T., Ed., Arkko, J., Brandt, A., Troan, O., and J. 115 Weil, "IPv6 Home Networking Architecture Principles", RFC 116 7368, DOI 10.17487/RFC7368, October 2014, 117 . 119 [RFC6126] Chroboczek, J., "The Babel Routing Protocol", RFC 6126, 120 DOI 10.17487/RFC6126, April 2011, 121 . 123 [RFC7557] Chroboczek, J., "Extension Mechanism for the Babel Routing 124 Protocol", RFC 7557, DOI 10.17487/RFC7557, May 2015, 125 . 127 [I-D.boutier-babel-source-specific] 128 Boutier, M. and J. Chroboczek, "Source-Specific Routing in 129 Babel", draft-boutier-babel-source-specific-01 (work in 130 progress), May 2015. 132 Authors' Addresses 134 Ray Bellis 135 Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. 136 950 Charter Street 137 Redwood City CA 94063 138 USA 140 Phone: +1 640 423 1200 141 Email: ray@isc.org 142 Mark Townsley 143 Cisco 145 Email: mark@townsley.net