Skip to main content

Encapsulation for Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER) in MPLS and Non-MPLS Networks
draft-ietf-bier-mpls-encapsulation-12

Approval announcement
Draft of message to be sent after approval:

Announcement

From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-bier-mpls-encapsulation@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, bier@ietf.org, akatlas@gmail.com, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, Tony Przygienda <tonysietf@gmail.com>, tonysietf@gmail.com, bier-chairs@ietf.org
Subject: Document Action: 'Encapsulation for Bit Index Explicit Replication in MPLS and non-MPLS Networks' to Experimental RFC (draft-ietf-bier-mpls-encapsulation-12.txt)

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Encapsulation for Bit Index Explicit Replication in MPLS and non-MPLS
   Networks'
  (draft-ietf-bier-mpls-encapsulation-12.txt) as Experimental RFC

This document is the product of the Bit Indexed Explicit Replication Working
Group.

The IESG contact persons are Alvaro Retana, Alia Atlas and Deborah Brungard.

A URL of this Internet Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bier-mpls-encapsulation/


Ballot Text

Technical Summary

   BIER represents a novel forwarding paradigm resulting in a
  replication-capable network underlay. The according header contains,
  amongst other information, a bitstring in which each bit represents
  exactly one egress router in the domain; to forward the packet to a
  given set of egress routers, the bits corresponding to those routers
  are set in the header.  The details of the encapsulation depend on
  the type of network used to realize the multicast domain.  This document
  specifies a BIER encapsulation that can be used in an MPLS network,
  or with slight differences, in a non-MPLS network as well.

Working Group Summary

   This document was processed by the BIER WG and underwent
  extensive WG and MPLS WG last call review. Several other
  proposals for non-MPLS encapsulation have been extended but
  expired after this document covered the space in a more
  uniform way. The document underwent
  a well-attended face to face interim WG meeting.
  Ultimate WG consensus was solid and the document has
  been supported by representatives of all major vendors, multiple large
  customers and a large custom silicon vendor.

Document Quality

Document underwent extensive number of revisions and
  solid amount of convergence and discussion over a
  period of three years. One major vendor confirmed
  implementation. At least two other, major vendors
  seem to be in the process without explicit confirmation.

Personnel

   Document Shepherd: Tony Przygienda (prz@juniper.net)
   Responsible Area Director: Alia Atlas (akatlas@gmail.com)

RFC Editor Note