One document matched: draft-venaas-pim-join-attr-assignment-policy-00.xml

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd" [
]>

<rfc category="std" ipr="trust200902"
     docName="draft-venaas-pim-join-attr-assignment-policy-00.txt">

<?xml-stylesheet type='text/xsl' href='rfc2629.xslt' ?>

<?rfc toc="yes" ?>
<?rfc symrefs="yes" ?>
<?rfc sortrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc iprnotified="no" ?>
<?rfc strict="yes" ?>

<front>
  <title>PIM Join Attribute Assignment Policy Update</title>
  <author initials='S.' surname='Venaas' fullname='Stig Venaas'>
    <organization>Cisco Systems</organization>
    <address><postal>
        <street>Tasman Drive</street>
	<city>San Jose</city> <region>CA</region>
	<code>95134</code>
	<country>USA</country>
      </postal>
      <email>stig@cisco.com</email></address>
  </author>
  <date/>
  <abstract>
    <t>This document updates the assignment policy of the PIM Join Attribute
    registry, changing the assignment policy from IETF Review to
    Specification Required.</t>
  </abstract>
</front>

<middle>
  <section title="Introduction">
    <t>This document changes the assignment policy of the PIM Join Attribute
    registry from IETF Review to Specification Required. The assignment
    polices are defined in <xref target="RFC5226"/>. With this change there
    is no longer a need for an RFC to be published to assign new join
    attributes, but a specification must be publicly available, and it will
    be reviewed by a Designated Expert as defined in <xref target="RFC5226"/>.
    </t>
  </section>

  <section title="Motivation">
    <t>The assignment policy for the PIM Join Attribute registry was initially
    IETF Review as specified in <xref target="RFC5384"/>. However, this
    requires an RFC to be published prior to assignment. There are cases
    where there is a strong desire to deploy a new protocol or product relying
    on new Join Attributes without having to wait for the IETF standardisation
    process. By changing the policy to Specification Required, there will still
    be a public specification and a review process to ensure it is technically
    sound, but without waiting for an RFC to be published.
    </t>
  </section>

  <section title="Review Criteria">
    <t>The expert is expected to ensure that the specification is of sufficient
    quality to ensure interoperability between implementations, that it does
    not conflict with how PIM operates, that it will not cause potential
    deployment issues, and that it does not conflict with other multicast
    protocols or work in the IETF. Also, potential security implications must
    be considered.</t>
    <t>In line with <xref target="RFC5384"/>, join attribute specifications
    are required to specify the procedure to apply if there are multiple
    instances of the same attribute type. Also it should be considered whether
    it is appropriate for the attribute to be transitive or not. The conflict
    resolution procedure must also be considered. If a procedure is specified,
    does it work as desired, or if not specified, is the default procedure
    specified in <xref target="RFC5384"/> appropriate for the attribute.
    </t>
  </section>

  <section title="Security Considerations">
    <t>This document by itself only changes a registry assignment policy which
    does not have any security issues in itself. When a Designated Expert
    reviews a new attribute specification, it is expected that the reviewer also
    considers the security aspects.
    </t>
  </section>

  <section title="IANA Considerations">
    <t>The assignment policy for the PIM Join Attribute registry is changed
    to Specification Required. IANA will need to update the registry
    description and accept and process assignment requests accordingly.
    </t>
  </section>
  <section title="Acknowledgments">
    <t>There have been discussions about assignment policies for the Join
    Attribute registry in the PIM WG,
    with several participants, William Atwood in particular. Based on
    this the author believes that this document is needed to change the
    assignment policy.</t>
  </section>
</middle>
<back>
  <references title='Informative References'>
    <?rfc include='reference.RFC.5226' ?>
  </references>
  <references title='Normative References'>
    <?rfc include='reference.RFC.5384' ?>
  </references>
</back>
</rfc>