--- 1/draft-ietf-mboned-interdomain-peering-bcp-13.txt 2017-10-30 17:13:43.769158694 -0700 +++ 2/draft-ietf-mboned-interdomain-peering-bcp-14.txt 2017-10-30 17:13:43.861160883 -0700 @@ -1,24 +1,24 @@ MBONED Working Group P. Tarapore, Ed. Internet-Draft R. Sayko Intended status: Best Current Practice AT&T -Expires: April 30, 2018 G. Shepherd +Expires: May 3, 2018 G. Shepherd Cisco T. Eckert, Ed. Huawei R. Krishnan SupportVectors - October 27, 2017 + October 30, 2017 Use of Multicast Across Inter-Domain Peering Points - draft-ietf-mboned-interdomain-peering-bcp-13 + draft-ietf-mboned-interdomain-peering-bcp-14 Abstract This document examines the use of Source Specific Multicast (SSM) across inter-domain peering points for a specified set of deployment scenarios. The objective is to describe the setup process for multicast-based delivery across administrative domains for these scenarios and document supporting functionality to enable this process. @@ -30,21 +30,21 @@ Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." - This Internet-Draft will expire on April 30, 2018. + This Internet-Draft will expire on May 3, 2018. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents @@ -328,23 +328,22 @@ the scope of this document. Architectural guidelines for this configuration are as follows: a. Dual homing for peering points between domains is recommended as a way to ensure reliability with full BGP table visibility. b. If the peering point between AD-1 and AD-2 is a controlled network environment, then bandwidth can be allocated accordingly by the two domains to permit the transit of non- rate adaptive - multicast traffic. If this is not the case, then it is - recommended that the multicast traffic should support rate- - adaption. + multicast traffic. If this is not the case, then the multicast + traffic must support rate-adaption (see [BCP145]). c. The sending and receiving of multicast traffic between two domains is typically determined by local policies associated with each domain. For example, if AD-1 is a service provider and AD-2 is an enterprise, then AD-1 may support local policies for traffic delivery to, but not traffic reception from, AD-2. Another example is the use of a policy by which AD-1 delivers specified content to AD-2 only if such delivery has been accepted by contract. @@ -1731,21 +1730,21 @@ Joel Jaeggli Albert Manfredi Stig Venaas Henrik Levkowetz 10. Change log [RFC Editor: Please remove] - Please see discussion on mailing list for changes before -111. + Please see discussion on mailing list for changes before -11. -11: version in IESG review. -12: XML'ified version of -11, committed solely to make rfcdiff easier. XML versions hosted on https://www.github.com/toerless/ peering-bcp -13: o IESG feedback. Complete details in: @@ -1802,20 +1801,22 @@ o Spencer Dawkins: Various editorial fixes. Removed BCP38 text from section 3, superceeded be explanation of PIM-SM RPF check to provide equvialent security to BCP38 in security section 7.1). o Eric Roscorla: (fixed from other reviews already). o Adam Roach: Fixed up text about MDH-04, added reference to RFC4786. + -13: Fix for Mirja's review on must for congestion control. + 11. References 11.1. Normative References [RFC2784] Farinacci, D., Li, T., Hanks, S., Meyer, D., and P. Traina, "Generic Routing Encapsulation (GRE)", RFC 2784, DOI 10.17487/RFC2784, March 2000, . [RFC3376] Cain, B., Deering, S., Kouvelas, I., Fenner, B., and A.