Routing Area

Director:


   o Joel Halpern:  jmh@network.com


Area Summary reported by Joel Halpern/Network Systems Corporation


Border Gateway Protocol Working Group (BGP) and OSI IDRP for IP Over IP
Working Group (IPIDRP)

The BGP and IPIDRP Working Groups met jointly.  The following issues
were discussed:  BGP status, IDRP-IP status, intra-domain route server,
route dampening, potential security attacks in TCP and its impact on
BGP, BGP future work, and support for ROLC with BGP. In the areas of
intra-domain route server and route dampening, the group agreed to
pursue the work further.  The group did not reach any clear consensus on
what has to be done with BGP, in regard to potential security attacks.
Concerning the area of BGP future work, it was suggested that the work
with BGP be confined to bug fixing and all new features should be
targeted towards IDRP-IP. There were no specific actions taken on
supporting ROLC with BGP.


Inter-Domain Multicast Routing Working Group (IDMR)

An update on the status of CBT implementation was presented, followed by
the presentation of the PIM specifications.  The sparse mode
specification was reviewed.  The dense mode specification was also
reviewed, with special attention to the PIM-Assert message for the
elimination of duplicates.  Open issues and implementation status for
PIM were also discussed.

There was an extensive discussion of a new version of IGMP. It has been
suggested that the IDMR group should undertake this work.  The new
version would be backwards compatible, and include support for various
aspects of the proposed inter-domain multicast routing technologies,
including the hooks for allowing a source to select tree building
techniques.  Following that was a discussion of administrative scoping
of multicasts and of multicast addresses.  It was suggested that a fixed
set of addresses could be allocated for administratively scoped
multicasts.


IP Routing for Wireless/Mobile Hosts Working Group (MOBILEIP)

An interim meeting of the MOBILEIP Working Group was held 21-22
February.  The editor, Charlie Kunzinger, announced that he had to leave
his post.  Bill Simpson was appointed the new editor.  There was
progress made on shedding features and converging on solutions.

The MOBILEIP Working Group met twice at the Seattle IETF. The first day
was mostly consumed with further refining the problem to be addressed.
The end of the first day, and the second day, was taken up with
reviewing the draft specification, section by section.  A little more
than one half of the document was covered during the review.  The
remainder of the document will be reviewed on the mailing list.  Steve
Deering announced that he was having to leave his position as chair of
the working group.


IS-IS for IP Internets Working Group (ISIS)

The working group met for one session in Seattle.  The two topics
discussed were a proposal to support IPX with IS-IS, and the progression
of the current documents.  Novell is participating in the IPX
discussion, and work will be proceeding.  Of the current documents,
several need minor revisions, and need to be re-issued.  Following this,
a request will be submitted to advance the documents, including the base
protocol, the protocol analysis, and the operational experience.  A
small set of base protocol changes/extensions are defined.  These will
be submitted to ISO for consideration.


Open Shortest Path First IGP Working Group (OSPF)

The OSPF Working Group discussed Christian Huitema's proposal for
non-trivial OSPF authentication, based on the MD5 algorithm.  Also
discussed was Fred Baker's Internet-Draft concerning a proposed new OSPF
interface type, the ``Point-to-Multipoint'' interface.  This new
interface simplifies configuration of OSPF over non-mesh Frame Relay
topologies.  Paul Serice gave a presentation on the OSPF scaling test
that was performed at COS in February.  Also, Fred Baker's new CIDR
Forwarding MIB was reviewed.


Routing Over Large Clouds Working Group (ROLC)

After a brief presentation of group history, the three current documents
(two variations on NHRP, and one called NARP) were discussed.  Issues
raised included the relationship to the routing topology, and whether
requesters (and responders) could be routers or had to be hosts.  It was
agreed that there should not be a second topology, but rather that the
routing topology would be used.  There was then a wide ranging
discussion of problems and issues.

This led the group to return to the questions of requirements.  It was
agreed that a requirements document was needed, and editors were found
for such.  A set of starting requirements was generated.

Finally, there was a joint meeting with the BGP/IPIDRP Working Groups to
discuss possible attributes that BGP/IPIDRP could carry which would help
the peer discovery process (also known as the cut-through route
selection).


Source Demand Routing Working Group (SDR)

The working group discussed several approaches to route construction for
SDR, including RIB query and ``Path Explorer'' mechanisms.  Both
mechanisms make use of BGP/IPIDRP RIBs and/or mechanisms.  Sue Hares,
Steve Hotz, Deborah Estrin, Yakov Rekhter, and Kannan Varadan plan to
complete preliminary design and specification, and to begin prototyping,
by the next IETF. In addition, they hope to get SDR forwarding and set
up implementations ported to other Unix environments (e.g., BSDi) to
facilitate experimentation with other folks around the Internet.