Routing Area Working Group
charter-ietf-rtgwg-05

WG review announcement

From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
Cc: rtgwg WG <rtgwg@ietf.org> 
Subject: WG Review: Routing Area Working Group (rtgwg)

The Routing Area Working Group (rtgwg) working group in the Routing Area
of the IETF is undergoing rechartering. The IESG has not made any
determination yet. The following draft charter was submitted, and is
provided for informational purposes only. Please send your comments to
the IESG mailing list (iesg at ietf.org) by 2014-10-02.

Routing Area Working Group (rtgwg)
------------------------------------------------
Current Status: Active WG

Chairs:
  Jeff Tantsura <jeff.tantsura@ericsson.com>
  Alvaro Retana <aretana@cisco.com>

Assigned Area Director:
  Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>

Mailing list
  Address: rtgwg@ietf.org
  To Subscribe: rtgwg-request@ietf.org
  Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtgwg/

Charter:

The Routing Area working group (RTGWG) is chartered to provide an
optional venue to discuss, evaluate, support and develop proposals for 
new work in the Routing Area and may work on specific small topics
that do not fit with an existing working group. 

Options for handling new work include:

- Directing the work to an existing WG (including RTGWG)
- Developing a proposal for a BoF.
- Developing a charter and establishing consensus for a new WG.  This
option will primarily be used with fairly mature and/or well-defined
efforts.
- Careful evaluation, leading to deferring or rejecting work.

It is expected that the proposals for new work will only include items
which
are not aligned with the work of other WGs or that may span multiple WGs.
The Area Directors and WG Chairs can provide guidance if there is any
doubt whether a topic should be discussed in RTGWG.

A major objective of the RTGWG is to provide timely, clear
dispositions of new efforts. Where there is consensus to take
on new work, the WG will strive to quickly find a home for it.
Reconsideration of proposals which have failed to gather consensus
will be prioritized behind proposals for new work which have not
yet been considered. In general, requests for reconsideration
should only be made once a proposal has been significantly
revised.

If RTGWG decides that a particular topic should be addressed by
a new WG, the chairs will recommend the work to the Routing ADs
with a summary of the evaluation.  The Routing ADs may then choose
to follow the normal IETF chartering process (potential BoF, IETF-wide
review of the proposed charter, etc.).

Guiding principles for evaluation of new work by RTGWG will include:

   1. Providing a clear problem statement for proposed new work.

   2. Prioritizing new efforts to manage the trade-offs between urgency,
       interest, and available resources in the Routing Area.

   3. Looking for commonalities among ongoing efforts.
       Such commonalities may indicate the need to develop more
       general, reusable solutions.  

   4. Ensuring appropriate cross-WG and cross-area review.

   5. Protecting the architectural integrity of the protocols developed
       in the Routing Area and ensuring that work has significant
applicability.

RTGWG may also work on specific small topics that do not fit with an
existing working group. An example of a small topic is a draft that might
otherwise be AD-sponsored but which could benefit from the review and
consensus that RTGWG can provide.  

RTGWG may work on larger topics, but must be explicitly rechartered to
add the topic.  The specific larger topics that RTGWG is currently
chartered to work on:

  * Enhancements to hop-by-hop distributed
    routing (e.g., multicast, LDP-MPLS, unicast routing) related to
    fast-reroute and loop-free convergence. A specific goal of
    fast-reroute mechanisms is to provide up to complete coverage when
    the potential failure would not partition the network. All work in
    this area should be specifically evaluated by the WG in terms of
    practicality and applicability to deployed networks.

The working group milestones will be updated as needed to reflect the
proposals currently being worked on and the target dates for their
completion. 

Milestones:


WG action announcement

From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
Cc: rtgwg WG <rtgwg@ietf.org> 
Subject: WG Action: Rechartered Routing Area Working Group (rtgwg)

The Routing Area Working Group (rtgwg) working group in the Routing Area
of the IETF has been rechartered. For additional information please
contact the Area Directors or the WG Chairs.

Routing Area Working Group (rtgwg)
------------------------------------------------
Current Status: Active WG

Chairs:
  Jeff Tantsura <jeff.tantsura@ericsson.com>
  Alvaro Retana <aretana@cisco.com>

Assigned Area Director:
  Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>

Mailing list
  Address: rtgwg@ietf.org
  To Subscribe: rtgwg-request@ietf.org
  Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtgwg/

Charter:

The Routing Area working group (RTGWG) is chartered to provide a
venue to discuss, evaluate, support and develop proposals for 
new work in the Routing Area and may work on specific small topics
that do not fit with an existing working group. 

Options for handling new work include:

- Directing the work to an existing WG (including RTGWG)
- Developing a proposal for a BoF.
- Developing a charter and establishing consensus for a new WG.  This
option will primarily be used with fairly mature and/or well-defined
efforts.
- Careful evaluation, leading to deferring or rejecting work.

It is expected that the proposals for new work will only include items
which
are not aligned with the work of other WGs or that may span multiple WGs.
The Area Directors and WG Chairs can provide guidance if there is any
doubt whether a topic should be discussed in RTGWG.

A major objective of the RTGWG is to provide timely, clear
dispositions of new efforts. Where there is consensus to take
on new work, the WG will strive to quickly find a home for it.
Reconsideration of proposals which have failed to gather consensus
will be prioritized behind proposals for new work which have not
yet been considered. In general, requests for reconsideration
should only be made once a proposal has been significantly
revised.

If RTGWG decides that a particular topic should be addressed by
a new WG, the chairs will recommend the work to the Routing ADs
with a summary of the evaluation.  The Routing ADs may then choose
to follow the normal IETF chartering process (potential BoF, IETF-wide
review of the proposed charter, etc.).

Guiding principles for evaluation of new work by RTGWG will include:

   1. Providing a clear problem statement for proposed new work.

   2. Prioritizing new efforts to manage the trade-offs between urgency,
       interest, and available resources in the Routing Area.

   3. Looking for commonalities among ongoing efforts.
       Such commonalities may indicate the need to develop more
       general, reusable solutions.  

   4. Ensuring appropriate cross-WG and cross-area review.

   5. Protecting the architectural integrity of the protocols developed
       in the Routing Area and ensuring that work has significant
applicability.

RTGWG may also work on specific small topics that do not fit with an
existing working group. An example of a small topic is a draft that might
otherwise be AD-sponsored but which could benefit from the review and
consensus that RTGWG can provide.  

RTGWG may work on larger topics, but must be explicitly rechartered to
add the topic.  The specific larger topics that RTGWG is currently
chartered to work on:

  * Enhancements to hop-by-hop distributed
    routing (e.g., multicast, LDP-MPLS, unicast routing) related to
    fast-reroute and loop-free convergence. A specific goal of
    fast-reroute mechanisms is to provide up to complete coverage when
    the potential failure would not partition the network. All work in
    this area should be specifically evaluated by the WG in terms of
    practicality and applicability to deployed networks.

  * Routing-related YANG models that are not appropriate for other RTG
working
    groups. 

The working group milestones will be updated as needed to reflect the
proposals currently being worked on and the target dates for their
completion. 

Milestones:
  Nov 2012 - Submit Composite-Link Requirements to IESG for publication
as Informational
  Nov 2012 - Submit initial Internet Draft on Multicast IP Fast Reroute
Architecture
  Nov 2012 - Submit Composite-Link Framework to IESG for publication as
Informational
  Apr 2013 - Submit specification on Advanced IP Fast Reroute mechanism
to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard


Ballot announcement