headers
internet-drafts | 2 Aug 2011 16:27
Picon
Favicon

I-D Action: draft-ietf-intarea-router-alert-considerations-08.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item
of the Internet Area Working Group Working Group of the IETF.

	Title           : IP Router Alert Considerations and Usage
	Author(s)       : Francois Le Faucheur
	Filename        : draft-ietf-intarea-router-alert-considerations-08.txt
	Pages           : 24
	Date            : 2011-08-02

   The IP Router Alert Option is an IP option that alerts transit
   routers to more closely examine the contents of an IP packet.
   Resource reSerVation Protocol (RSVP), Pragmatic General Multicast
   (PGM), Internet Group Management Protocol (IGMP), Multicast Listener
   Discovery (MLD), Multicast Router Discovery (MRD) and General
   Internet Signalling Transport (GIST) are some of the protocols that
   make use of the IP Router Alert Option.  This document discusses
   security aspects and usage guidelines around the use of the current
   IP Router Alert Option.  Specifically, it provides recommendation
   against using the Router Alert in the end-to-end open Internet as
   well as identify controlled environments where protocols depending on
   Router Alert can be used safely.  It also provides recommendation
   about protection approaches for Service Providers.  Finally it
   provides brief guidelines for Router Alert implementation on routers.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-intarea-router-alert-considerations-08.txt

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Templin, Fred L | 6 Aug 2011 01:56
Picon
Favicon

IRON - a new version with new insights

Hello,

As you know, IRON [RFC6179] is a product of the IRTF
Routing Research Group. We have since discussed its
applicability in the Intarea, and I have therefore
decided to create a (bis) version to move beyond the
IRTF research realm and into practical aspects of
interest to the IETF.

See below for an announcement of the (bis). This
version is in many ways a simplification of the RRG
work, and removes aspects that would impede or limit
applicability. The new version observes that the IRON
deployment model parallels the numerous successful
IPv6 tunnelbroker network deployments which today
provide a robust IPv6 service to clients. These
examples therfore provide existence proofs that
key aspects of the IRON approach are feasible.

The IRON Client/Server relationship is in fact a very
close parallel to tunnel broker. However, IRON also
provides a route optimization capability that combines
the best aspects of tunnelbroker and NBMA automatic
tunneling. IRON in fact reaches well beyond the basic
tunnelbroker service model and tackles key features
of interest to Intarea including mobility, multiple
interfaces, traffic engineering, IPv6 addressing, etc.

Again, this is a new IRON with new insights for this
group to consider. In terms of technology maturity
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Jari Arkko | 19 Aug 2011 20:02

AD review of draft-ietf-intarea-ipv6-required

I have reviewed this draft, found it ready to move forward, and sent it 
to IETF Last Call. Thanks for writing this draft.

I only had a very minor editorial comment:

> IPv6 [RFC1883 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1883>] was proposed in 1995 as, among other things, a
> solution to the limitations on globally unique addressing that IPv4's
> 32-bit addressing space represented, and has been under continuous
> refinement and deployment ever since.  [RFC2460 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2460>]. 

s/.  [RFC2460]/ [RFC2460]/

(I think, it was not clear to me why you placed a reference here.)

Jari
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane