[Chapter-delegates] Statement relating to today’s ITU-T SG15 MPLS development decision

[Christopher Wilkinson]

Good evening:

Before taking this matter up with relevant policy makers, could we  
please have a definition and explanation of what is MPLS and OAM.
What was the IETF position in the ITU-T SG15? Who was in the meetings?  
What reports were filed to ITU and to ISOC? Where are they?
In what respects are the ITU and IETF implementations of MPLS-OAM  
incompatible?

Why are we told about a problem in this area, apparently only after  
the event?

Thankyou and regards

Christopher Wilkinson
Chair, ISOC-ECC.org



On 25 Feb 2011, at 23:51, Anya Chambers wrote:

>
> Dear all
>
>
> Please find below the IETF/ Internet Society statement in response  
> to the regrettable decision taken today by the ITU-T to diverge  
> future MPLS development.
>
> To link to it: http://isoc.org/wp/newsletter/?p=3287
>
> Regards
>
> Anya
>
>
>
> IETF and Internet Society Statement relating to today’s ITU-T SG15  
> decision that will lead to non-interoperability in MPLS development
>
> Today, the ITU-T Study Group 15 determined a Recommendation that  
> defines Y.1731 based operations, administration and management (OAM)  
> for MPLS transport networks. This decision sets the stage for a  
> divergence in MPLS development; it creates a situation where some  
> vendors will use the IETF standard for MPLS OAM while other vendors  
> implement the ITU-T Recommendation for OAM. This situation ensures  
> that the two product groups will not work together. While the impact  
> may not be immediate, ongoing evolution along this path will  
> jeopardize the globally interconnected Internet, which is an  
> interoperable network of networks.
>
> Russ Housley, IETF chair, commented; "The Internet we know today  
> could not have come about without open, interoperable, global  
> standards. After we have worked so long and so hard together to  
> ensure that MPLS OAM products from all vendors around the world  
> would be compatible with each other, I am surprised and disappointed  
> by the action taken by the ITU-T today, which takes us off the path  
> of global interoperability for this technology. The decision is all  
> the more regrettable because the IETF is just completing work on the  
> first major phase of extensions to MPLS OAM protocols for use in  
> transport networks.”
>
> Furthermore, this ITU-T SG15 action represents a serious breach of  
> the IETF/ ITU-T Joint Working Team (JWT) agreement. This JWT was  
> commissioned by the ITU-T and IETF to examine the feasibility of a  
> single, collaborative solution to MPLS transport requirements. The  
> team unanimously agreed that a single viable solution had been  
> identified;  their report was completed in April 2008 and accepted  
> in December 2008. This JWT Report states not only that a single  
> solution was possible but also recommended an approach where  
> protocol development for MPLS-TP would be undertaken by the IETF.  
> The IETF and ITU-T independently accepted and endorsed the JWT  
> report. The ITU-T committed to the IETF that they would abide by the  
> JWT recommendations and recognized the IETF as the design authority  
> for MPLS. Furthermore, the JWT confirmed that it was technically  
> feasible to extend the existing MPLS architecture to meet the  
> requirements of a transport profile, now called MPLS-TP. Since the  
> acceptance of the JWT Report, both organizations have worked  
> constructively until now.
>
> "Resolution 101 represented the clear wishes of the member states of  
> the ITU, and was agreed at the ITU's Plenipotentiary conference less  
> than six months ago. That Resolution was agreed at the highest level  
> of the Union, and yet SG15 has taken action that directly  
> contradicts it,” said Lynn St. Amour, president and CEO of the  
> Internet Society.
>
> “The IETF will complete its work on a MPLS OAM specification, and  
> the IETF leadership is considering the best way to proceed in light  
> of this surprising development,” added Russ Housley.  “At this  
> point, our goal is to minimize the negative consequences of this  
> unfortunate situation. The priority is to establish a measured and  
> careful approach that protects the stability of the Internet while  
> enabling it to grow to serve the entire world-wide population.”
>
> Although the ITU-T SG15 decision is disappointing, in an ongoing  
> pursuit of a globally interoperable solution, the IETF will continue  
> to gather transport requirements and work to extend IETF MPLS  
> forwarding, OAM, survivability, network management, and control  
> plane protocols to meet those requirements through the IETF  
> Standards Process.
>
> When two non-interoperable standards are developed, there are only  
> two possible outcomes: if both technologies are deployed, there will  
> be confusion, if only one is deployed, the existence of the  
> alternative is irrelevant. In this instance, there are believed to  
> be commercial products in development for both proposals, so  
> confusion appears inevitable.
>
> Russ Housley concluded, “The IETF leadership continues to believe  
> that a single OAM solution will better serve the continued growth of  
> Internet, and we hope that the ITU-T leadership will also come to  
> recognize the benefits of a single globally interoperable solution.”
>
>
>
> Anya Chambers
> Internet Society
>
> mobile: +1 224 321 0378
> web: www.InternetSociety.org
> twitter: InternetSociety
>
> What will the Internet look like in 10 years?
> Watch the trailer; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OInTXcZ4HZM
>
> For more information: www.internetsociety.org/scenarios
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Chapter-delegates mailing list
> Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20110226/fc2b4b2c/attachment.htm>