Encapsulation of MPLS over Layer 2 Tunneling Protocol Version 3
Draft of message to be sent after approval:
From: The IESG <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: IETF-Announce <email@example.com> Cc: Internet Architecture Board <firstname.lastname@example.org>, RFC Editor <email@example.com>, mpls mailing list <firstname.lastname@example.org>, mpls chair <email@example.com> Subject: Protocol Action: 'Encapsulation of MPLS over Layer 2 Tunneling Protocol Version 3' to Proposed Standard The IESG has approved the following document: - 'Encapsulation of MPLS over Layer 2 Tunneling Protocol Version 3 ' <draft-ietf-mpls-over-l2tpv3-04.txt> as a Proposed Standard This document is the product of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group. The IESG contact persons are Ross Callon and David Ward. A URL of this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-over-l2tpv3-04.txt
Technical Summary The Layer 2 Tunneling Protocol, Version 3, (L2TPv3) defines a protocol for tunneling a variety of payload types over IP networks. This document defines how to carry an MPLS label stack and its payload over L2TPv3. This enables an application which traditionally requires an MPLS-enabled core network to utilize an L2TPv3 encapsulation over an IP network instead. Working Group Summary There is a need for one or more approaches to run MPLS over a datagram (IP) infrastructure. Options include MPLS directly over IP, MPLS over GRE, or MPLS over L2TP. There is some difference of opinion regarding which approach to use, but there is rough consensus to go ahead with this approach, and some who see advantages (particularly wrt security) for this approach. Also, given that this is currently deployed, there is a significant value in documenting this approach. Protocol Quality Ross Callon has reviewed the spec for the IESG. There are multiple implementations, although as far as I know they are from one (very large) vendor. The protocol has been deployed in more than one network. There are a few minor editorial nits that were pointed out in Gen-ART review. The authors intend to update the draft to fix these minor nits, but intend to do this at the same time as any IESG comments are addressed.