Internet DRAFT - draft-venaas-pim-join-attr-assignment-policy
draft-venaas-pim-join-attr-assignment-policy
Network Working Group S. Venaas
Internet-Draft Cisco Systems
Intended status: Standards Track October 24, 2014
Expires: April 27, 2015
PIM Join Attribute Assignment Policy Update
draft-venaas-pim-join-attr-assignment-policy-00.txt
Abstract
This document updates the assignment policy of the PIM Join Attribute
registry, changing the assignment policy from IETF Review to
Specification Required.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on April 27, 2015.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Venaas Expires April 27, 2015 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft PIM Join Attribute Assignment Policy Update October 2014
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. Review Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
6. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
7.1. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
7.2. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1. Introduction
This document changes the assignment policy of the PIM Join Attribute
registry from IETF Review to Specification Required. The assignment
polices are defined in [RFC5226]. With this change there is no
longer a need for an RFC to be published to assign new join
attributes, but a specification must be publicly available, and it
will be reviewed by a Designated Expert as defined in [RFC5226].
2. Motivation
The assignment policy for the PIM Join Attribute registry was
initially IETF Review as specified in [RFC5384]. However, this
requires an RFC to be published prior to assignment. There are cases
where there is a strong desire to deploy a new protocol or product
relying on new Join Attributes without having to wait for the IETF
standardisation process. By changing the policy to Specification
Required, there will still be a public specification and a review
process to ensure it is technically sound, but without waiting for an
RFC to be published.
3. Review Criteria
The expert is expected to ensure that the specification is of
sufficient quality to ensure interoperability between
implementations, that it does not conflict with how PIM operates,
that it will not cause potential deployment issues, and that it does
not conflict with other multicast protocols or work in the IETF.
Also, potential security implications must be considered.
In line with [RFC5384], join attribute specifications are required to
specify the procedure to apply if there are multiple instances of the
same attribute type. Also it should be considered whether it is
appropriate for the attribute to be transitive or not. The conflict
resolution procedure must also be considered. If a procedure is
Venaas Expires April 27, 2015 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft PIM Join Attribute Assignment Policy Update October 2014
specified, does it work as desired, or if not specified, is the
default procedure specified in [RFC5384] appropriate for the
attribute.
4. Security Considerations
This document by itself only changes a registry assignment policy
which does not have any security issues in itself. When a Designated
Expert reviews a new attribute specification, it is expected that the
reviewer also considers the security aspects.
5. IANA Considerations
The assignment policy for the PIM Join Attribute registry is changed
to Specification Required. IANA will need to update the registry
description and accept and process assignment requests accordingly.
6. Acknowledgments
There have been discussions about assignment policies for the Join
Attribute registry in the PIM WG, with several participants, William
Atwood in particular. Based on this the author believes that this
document is needed to change the assignment policy.
7. References
7.1. Informative References
[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
May 2008.
7.2. Normative References
[RFC5384] Boers, A., Wijnands, I., and E. Rosen, "The Protocol
Independent Multicast (PIM) Join Attribute Format", RFC
5384, November 2008.
Author's Address
Stig Venaas
Cisco Systems
Tasman Drive
San Jose, CA 95134
USA
Email: stig@cisco.com
Venaas Expires April 27, 2015 [Page 3]
