A framework for Management and Control of DWDM optical interface parameters
draft-ietf-ccamp-dwdm-if-mng-ctrl-fwk-13
Revision differences
Document history
Date | Rev. | By | Action |
---|---|---|---|
2020-01-25
|
13 | (System) | Document has expired |
2019-07-24
|
13 | Gabriele Galimberti | New version available: draft-ietf-ccamp-dwdm-if-mng-ctrl-fwk-13.txt |
2019-07-24
|
13 | (System) | New version approved |
2019-07-24
|
13 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Gert Grammel , ccamp-chairs@ietf.org, Julien Meuric , Gabriele Galimberti , Dieter Beller , Ruediger Kunze |
2019-07-24
|
13 | Gabriele Galimberti | Uploaded new revision |
2019-05-17
|
12 | (System) | Document has expired |
2019-05-17
|
12 | (System) | IESG state changed to Dead from AD is watching |
2018-12-05
|
12 | Deborah Brungard | IESG state changed to AD is watching from AD Evaluation |
2018-12-05
|
12 | Deborah Brungard | Based on SG15 Liaison and AD review, the document needs to be enhanced to describe what is needed for IETF protocol work. |
2018-12-05
|
12 | Deborah Brungard | Tag Revised I-D Needed - Issue raised by AD set. |
2018-12-05
|
12 | Deborah Brungard | IETF WG state changed to WG Document from Submitted to IESG for Publication |
2018-11-13
|
12 | Gabriele Galimberti | New version available: draft-ietf-ccamp-dwdm-if-mng-ctrl-fwk-12.txt |
2018-11-13
|
12 | (System) | New version approved |
2018-11-13
|
12 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Gert Grammel , ccamp-chairs@ietf.org, Julien Meuric , Gabriele Galimberti , Dieter Beller , Ruediger Kunze |
2018-11-13
|
12 | Gabriele Galimberti | Uploaded new revision |
2018-07-12
|
11 | Deborah Brungard | IESG state changed to AD Evaluation from Expert Review |
2018-06-11
|
11 | Gabriele Galimberti | New version available: draft-ietf-ccamp-dwdm-if-mng-ctrl-fwk-11.txt |
2018-06-11
|
11 | (System) | New version approved |
2018-06-11
|
11 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Gert Grammel , ccamp-chairs@ietf.org, Julien Meuric , Gabriele Galimberti , Dieter Beller , Ruediger Kunze |
2018-06-11
|
11 | Gabriele Galimberti | Uploaded new revision |
2018-06-06
|
10 | Gabriele Galimberti | New version available: draft-ietf-ccamp-dwdm-if-mng-ctrl-fwk-10.txt |
2018-06-06
|
10 | (System) | New version approved |
2018-06-06
|
10 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Gert Grammel , ccamp-chairs@ietf.org, Julien Meuric , Gabriele Galimberti , Dieter Beller , Ruediger Kunze |
2018-06-06
|
10 | Gabriele Galimberti | Uploaded new revision |
2018-03-12
|
09 | Min Ye | Request for Last Call review by RTGDIR Completed: Has Issues. Reviewer: Dhruv Dhody. |
2018-02-20
|
09 | Jonathan Hardwick | Request for Last Call review by RTGDIR is assigned to Dhruv Dhody |
2018-02-20
|
09 | Jonathan Hardwick | Request for Last Call review by RTGDIR is assigned to Dhruv Dhody |
2018-02-14
|
09 | Jonathan Hardwick | Request for Last Call review by RTGDIR is assigned to Mach Chen |
2018-02-14
|
09 | Jonathan Hardwick | Request for Last Call review by RTGDIR is assigned to Mach Chen |
2018-02-13
|
09 | Deborah Brungard | IESG state changed to Expert Review from Publication Requested |
2018-02-13
|
09 | Deborah Brungard | Changed consensus to Yes from Unknown |
2018-02-13
|
09 | Deborah Brungard | Requested Last Call review by RTGDIR |
2017-12-15
|
09 | Daniele Ceccarelli | As required by RFC 4858, this is the current template for the Document Shepherd Write-Up. Changes are expected over time. This version is dated … As required by RFC 4858, this is the current template for the Document Shepherd Write-Up. Changes are expected over time. This version is dated 24 February 2012. (1) What type of RFC is being requested (BCP, Proposed Standard, Internet Standard, Informational, Experimental, or Historic)? Why is this the proper type of RFC? Is this type of RFC indicated in the title page header? >Informational. This is a framework document, the informational type is appropriate and correctly indicated in the front page. Although the document contains some RFC 2119 language, this is limited to very high-level requirements for the design of the related YANG models and protocol extensions. A note in section 1.1 explains the usage of RFC2119 language. (2) The IESG approval announcement includes a Document Announcement Write-Up. Please provide such a Document Announcement Write-Up. Recent examples can be found in the "Action" announcements for approved documents. The approval announcement contains the following sections: Technical Summary >The control and management of DWDM interfaces are a precondition for enhanced multilayer networking. They are needed to ensure an efficient data transport, to meet the requirements requested by today's IP-services and to provide a further automation of network provisioning and operations. This document describes use cases, requirements and solutions for the control and management of optical interface parameters according to different types of single channel DWDM interfaces. The focus is on automating the network provisioning process irrespective on how it is triggered i.e. by EMS, NMS or GMPLS. This document covers management and control considerations in different scenarios of single channel DWDM interfaces. The purpose is to identify the necessary information and processes to be used by control or management systems to properly and efficiently drive the network. Working Group Summary >This document has been reviewed by the CCAMP and received comments both during the meetings and on the mailing list. It is supported by vendors and service providers and received no objection. Document Quality > The documents has already gone through a routing directorate review and all comments have been addressed. No further particular review is needed in addition to general ones to make sure the document is fully understandable and well written. Personnel >Daniele Ceccarelli is the shepherd >Deborah Brungard is the responsible area director. (3) Briefly describe the review of this document that was performed by the Document Shepherd. If this version of the document is not ready for publication, please explain why the document is being forwarded to the IESG. >The document shepherd has reviewed the current revision of thedocument and believes it is ready for publication. (4) Does the document Shepherd have any concerns about the depth or breadth of the reviews that have been performed? > No concerns (5) Do portions of the document need review from a particular or from broader perspective, e.g., security, operational complexity, AAA, DNS, DHCP, XML, or internationalization? If so, describe the review that took place. > None in particular. (6) Describe any specific concerns or issues that the Document Shepherd has with this document that the Responsible Area Director and/or the IESG should be aware of? For example, perhaps he or she is uncomfortable with certain parts of the document, or has concerns whether there really is a need for it. In any event, if the WG has discussed those issues and has indicated that it still wishes to advance the document, detail those concerns here. > No such concerns. (7) Has each author confirmed that any and all appropriate IPR disclosures required for full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79 have already been filed. If not, explain why. > The reply of each single author and contributor has been recorded in the history of the document. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ccamp-dwdm-if-mng-ctrl-fwk/history/ (8) Has an IPR disclosure been filed that references this document? If so, summarize any WG discussion and conclusion regarding the IPR disclosures. > No IPR disclosed against the document. (9) How solid is the WG consensus behind this document? Does it represent the strong concurrence of a few individuals, with others being silent, or does the WG as a whole understand and agree with it? > The document is supported by most of the vendors and service provider active in the WG. (10) Has anyone threatened an appeal or otherwise indicated extreme discontent? If so, please summarise the areas of conflict in separate email messages to the Responsible Area Director. (It should be in a separate email because this questionnaire is publicly available.) > No threats or discontent. (11) Identify any ID nits the Document Shepherd has found in this document. (See https://www.ietf.org/tools/idnits/ and the Internet-Drafts Checklist). Boilerplate checks are not enough; this check needs to be thorough. > No issue found by the tool. (12) Describe how the document meets any required formal review criteria, such as the MIB Doctor, media type, and URI type reviews. > No such review needed. (13) Have all references within this document been identified as either normative or informative? > Yes, all the references have been identified correctly. (14) Are there normative references to documents that are not ready for advancement or are otherwise in an unclear state? If such normative references exist, what is the plan for their completion? > Normative references only include published RFCs. (15) Are there downward normative references references (see RFC 3967)? If so, list these downward references to support the Area Director in the Last Call procedure. > No downward references. (16) Will publication of this document change the status of any existing RFCs? Are those RFCs listed on the title page header, listed in the abstract, and discussed in the introduction? If the RFCs are not listed in the Abstract and Introduction, explain why, and point to the part of the document where the relationship of this document to the other RFCs is discussed. If this information is not in the document, explain why the WG considers it unnecessary. >No change to existing RFCs. (17) Describe the Document Shepherd's review of the IANA considerations section, especially with regard to its consistency with the body of the document. Confirm that all protocol extensions that the document makes are associated with the appropriate reservations in IANA registries. Confirm that any referenced IANA registries have been clearly identified. Confirm that newly created IANA registries include a detailed specification of the initial contents for the registry, that allocations procedures for future registrations are defined, and a reasonable name for the new registry has been suggested (see RFC 5226). >The IANA consideration section does not include any request to IANA. (18) List any new IANA registries that require Expert Review for future allocations. Provide any public guidance that the IESG would find useful in selecting the IANA Experts for these new registries. > None. (19) Describe reviews and automated checks performed by the Document Shepherd to validate sections of the document written in a formal language, such as XML code, BNF rules, MIB definitions, etc. >No such sections. |
2017-12-15
|
09 | Daniele Ceccarelli | Responsible AD changed to Deborah Brungard |
2017-12-15
|
09 | Daniele Ceccarelli | IETF WG state changed to Submitted to IESG for Publication from In WG Last Call |
2017-12-15
|
09 | Daniele Ceccarelli | IESG state changed to Publication Requested |
2017-12-15
|
09 | Daniele Ceccarelli | IESG process started in state Publication Requested |
2017-12-15
|
09 | Daniele Ceccarelli | Changed document writeup |
2017-12-15
|
09 | Gabriele Galimberti | New version available: draft-ietf-ccamp-dwdm-if-mng-ctrl-fwk-09.txt |
2017-12-15
|
09 | (System) | New version approved |
2017-12-15
|
09 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Gert Grammel , ccamp-chairs@ietf.org, Julien Meuric , Gabriele Galimberti , Dieter Beller , Ruediger Kunze |
2017-12-15
|
09 | Gabriele Galimberti | Uploaded new revision |
2017-12-13
|
08 | Daniele Ceccarelli | Notification list changed to Daniele Ceccarelli <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com> |
2017-12-13
|
08 | Daniele Ceccarelli | Document shepherd changed to Daniele Ceccarelli |
2017-12-13
|
08 | Gabriele Galimberti | New version available: draft-ietf-ccamp-dwdm-if-mng-ctrl-fwk-08.txt |
2017-12-13
|
08 | (System) | New version approved |
2017-12-13
|
08 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Gert Grammel , ccamp-chairs@ietf.org, Julien Meuric , Gabriele Galimberti , Dieter Beller , Ruediger Kunze |
2017-12-13
|
08 | Gabriele Galimberti | Uploaded new revision |
2017-11-21
|
07 | Daniele Ceccarelli | IPR poll (Daniele) https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/nIP5tHnhI7zgGZGv02JoHTw7T50 AUTHORS Ruediger Kunze RKunze@telekom.de https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/FzAE9d-RyEK1GYcRZMXvovBJYsI Gert Grammel ggrammel@juniper.net https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/N1zorgzdU8q0kzqJnP7MMXGkSRA Dieter Beller Dieter.Beller@nokia.com https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/1MJgIjwkB0eHtYWuRMZEWYHHA8c Gabriele Galimberti ggalimbe@cisco.com https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/GBuQosOy9ZBNAaWK9UiHzP6Fi28 Julien Meuric julien.meuric@orange.com https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/unsg61Xhuk81wTs16VCCg2yG2Pc … IPR poll (Daniele) https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/nIP5tHnhI7zgGZGv02JoHTw7T50 AUTHORS Ruediger Kunze RKunze@telekom.de https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/FzAE9d-RyEK1GYcRZMXvovBJYsI Gert Grammel ggrammel@juniper.net https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/N1zorgzdU8q0kzqJnP7MMXGkSRA Dieter Beller Dieter.Beller@nokia.com https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/1MJgIjwkB0eHtYWuRMZEWYHHA8c Gabriele Galimberti ggalimbe@cisco.com https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/GBuQosOy9ZBNAaWK9UiHzP6Fi28 Julien Meuric julien.meuric@orange.com https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/unsg61Xhuk81wTs16VCCg2yG2Pc Arnold Mattheus arnold.Mattheus@telekom.de https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/WAkp2ca1ibVz57FrLMP5nLNW6pM Manuel Paul Manuel.Paul@telekom.de https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/hRdXzwEI6m8aRmCmlDvavfmvK8M Josef Roese j.roese@telekom.de https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/E4ei4GjZXfCirHBl-P7mKndGoQ8 Frank Luennemann Frank.Luennemann@telekom.de https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/36iMgLB5sTSgHXvJPCkdCXengtM |
2017-11-21
|
07 | Daniele Ceccarelli | IETF WG state changed to In WG Last Call from WG Document |
2017-09-05
|
07 | Gabriele Galimberti | New version available: draft-ietf-ccamp-dwdm-if-mng-ctrl-fwk-07.txt |
2017-09-05
|
07 | (System) | New version approved |
2017-09-04
|
07 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Gert Grammel , ccamp-chairs@ietf.org, Julien Meuric , Gabriele Galimberti , Dieter Beller , Ruediger Kunze |
2017-09-04
|
07 | Gabriele Galimberti | Uploaded new revision |
2017-08-07
|
06 | Min Ye | Request for Early review by RTGDIR Completed: Has Nits. Reviewer: Keyur Patel. |
2017-07-10
|
06 | Daniele Ceccarelli | Added to session: IETF-99: ccamp Thu-1550 |
2017-07-04
|
06 | Min Ye | Request for Early review by RTGDIR is assigned to Keyur Patel |
2017-07-04
|
06 | Min Ye | Request for Early review by RTGDIR is assigned to Keyur Patel |
2017-07-04
|
06 | Daniele Ceccarelli | Requested Early review by RTGDIR |
2017-06-30
|
06 | Gabriele Galimberti | New version available: draft-ietf-ccamp-dwdm-if-mng-ctrl-fwk-06.txt |
2017-06-30
|
06 | (System) | New version approved |
2017-06-30
|
06 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Gabriele Galimberti , Gert Grammel , Dieter Beller , Ruediger Kunze , ccamp-chairs@ietf.org |
2017-06-30
|
06 | Gabriele Galimberti | Uploaded new revision |
2017-06-16
|
05 | Gabriele Galimberti | New version available: draft-ietf-ccamp-dwdm-if-mng-ctrl-fwk-05.txt |
2017-06-16
|
05 | (System) | New version approved |
2017-06-16
|
05 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Gabriele Galimberti , Gert Grammel , Dieter Beller , Ruediger Kunze , ccamp-chairs@ietf.org |
2017-06-16
|
05 | Gabriele Galimberti | Uploaded new revision |
2017-03-24
|
04 | Daniele Ceccarelli | Added to session: IETF-98: ccamp Tue-1450 |
2017-03-13
|
04 | Gabriele Galimberti | New version available: draft-ietf-ccamp-dwdm-if-mng-ctrl-fwk-04.txt |
2017-03-13
|
04 | (System) | New version approved |
2017-03-13
|
04 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Gabriele Galimberti , Gert Grammel , Dieter Beller , Ruediger Kunze , ccamp-chairs@ietf.org |
2017-03-13
|
04 | Gabriele Galimberti | Uploaded new revision |
2016-11-12
|
03 | Daniele Ceccarelli | Added to session: IETF-97: ccamp Mon-1550 |
2016-11-04
|
03 | Daniele Ceccarelli | Added to session: IETF-97: ccamp Thu-1330 |
2016-10-31
|
03 | Gabriele Galimberti | New version available: draft-ietf-ccamp-dwdm-if-mng-ctrl-fwk-03.txt |
2016-10-31
|
03 | (System) | New version approved |
2016-10-31
|
02 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: "Dieter Beller" , ccamp-chairs@ietf.org, "Gabriele Galimberti" , "Gert Grammel" , "Ruediger Kunze" |
2016-10-31
|
02 | Gabriele Galimberti | Uploaded new revision |
2016-07-08
|
02 | Gabriele Galimberti | New version available: draft-ietf-ccamp-dwdm-if-mng-ctrl-fwk-02.txt |
2016-04-06
|
01 | Gabriele Galimberti | New version available: draft-ietf-ccamp-dwdm-if-mng-ctrl-fwk-01.txt |
2016-04-04
|
00 | Daniele Ceccarelli | Intended Status changed to Informational from None |
2016-04-04
|
00 | Daniele Ceccarelli | This document now replaces draft-kdkgall-ccamp-dwdm-if-mng-ctrl-fwk instead of None |
2016-04-04
|
00 | Gabriele Galimberti | New version available: draft-ietf-ccamp-dwdm-if-mng-ctrl-fwk-00.txt |