oldcharter.txt   newcharter3.txt 
skipping to change at line 39 skipping to change at line 39
The purpose of the MIF working group is to describe the issues of The purpose of the MIF working group is to describe the issues of
attaching to multiple networks on hosts and document existing practice. attaching to multiple networks on hosts and document existing practice.
The group shall also analyze the impacts and effectiveness of these The group shall also analyze the impacts and effectiveness of these
existing mechanisms. The WG shall employ and refer to existing IETF work existing mechanisms. The WG shall employ and refer to existing IETF work
in this area, including, for instance, strong/weak models (RFC 1122), in this area, including, for instance, strong/weak models (RFC 1122),
address selection (RFC 3484), ICE and other mechanisms higher layers can address selection (RFC 3484), ICE and other mechanisms higher layers can
use for address selection, DHCP mechanisms, Router Advertisement use for address selection, DHCP mechanisms, Router Advertisement
mechanisms, and DNS recommendations. The focus of the working group mechanisms, and DNS recommendations. The focus of the working group
should be on documenting the system level effects to host IP stacks and should be on documenting the system level effects to host IP stacks and
identification of gaps between the existing IETF recommendations and identification of gaps between the existing IETF recommendations and
existing practice. The working group shall address both IPv4 and IPv6 as existing practice. After completing some of its initial goals in 2010 the
well as stateless and stateful configuration. group is also developing three specific extensions:
1) DNS server selection solution: a specification for describing a way
for a network to communicate to nodes information required to perform
advanced DNS server selection at name resolution request granularity
in scenarios involving multiple namespaces. The specification shall
describe the information to be delivered for nodes and the protocol to
be used for delivery.
2) DHCPv6 routing configuration: DHCPv6 routing configuration: a
specification of DHCPv6 options allowing to provision client nodes
with small amount of static routing information (e.g. regarding
first-hop selection). This is an additional mechanism to the one
already defined in RFC 4191 to enable per-host configuration in a
managed network environment. The development of dynamic routing
capabilities or ability to send more than a few specific routes are
explicitly outside the scope of work in this , and require the use of either existing
or new routing protocols.
3) MIF API: While no changes are needed for applications to run on
multiple interface hosts, a new API could provide additional services
to applications running on hosts attached to multiple provisioning
domains. For instance, these services could assist advanced
applications in having greater control over first-hop, source address
and/or DNS selection issues. This API will be defined as an abstract
interface specification, i.e., specific details about mapping to
operating system primitives or programming language will be left out.
Network discovery and selection on lower layers as defined by RFC 5113 Network discovery and selection on lower layers as defined by RFC 5113
is out of scope. Also, the group shall not develop new protocol or is out of scope. With the exception of support for additional DHCP
policy mechanisms; recommendations and gap analysis from the group are options in DHCP servers, group shall not assume any software beyond
solely based on existing solutions. The group shall not assume any basic IP protocol support on its peers or in network nodes. No work
software beyond basic IP protocol support on its peers or in network will be done to enable traffic flows to move from one interface to
nodes. No work will be done to enable traffic flows to move from one another. The group recognizes existing work on mechanisms that require
interface to another. The group recognizes existing work on mechanisms peer or network support for moving traffic flows such as RFC 5206, RFC
that require peer or network support for moving traffic flows such as 4980 and the use of multiple care-of addresses in Mobile IPv6. This
RFC 5206, RFC 4980 and the use of multiple care-of addresses in Mobile group does not work on or impact such mechanisms.
IPv6. This group does not work on or impact such mechanisms.
Once the group has completed its work items, the IETF can make an Future work in this area requires rechartering the working group or
informed decision about rechartering the working group to define new asking other, specialized working groups (such as DHC or 6MAN) to deal
mechanisms or asking other, specialized working groups (such as DHC or with specific issues.
6MAN) to deal with specific issues.
Goals and Milestones Goals and Milestones
Done WG chartered Done WG chartered
Done Initial draft on problem statement adopted by the WG Done Initial draft on problem statement adopted by the WG
Done Initial draft on existing practices adopted by the WG Done Initial draft on existing practices adopted by the WG
Dec 2009 Initial draft on analysis of existing practices adopted by the WG Done Initial draft on analysis of existing practices adopted by the WG
Mar 2010 Problem statement draft submitted to the IESG for publication as an Informational RFC Done Problem statement draft submitted to the IESG for publication as an Informational RFC
Jul 2010 Existing practices draft submitted to the IESG for publication as an Informational RFC Done Existing practices draft submitted to the IESG for publication as an Informational RFC
Sep 2010 Analysis draft submitted to the IESG for publication as an Informational RFC Dec 2010 Initial WG draft on DHCPv6 option for routing configuration
Oct 2010 Recharter or close Jan 2011 Analysis draft submitted to the IESG for publication as an Informational RFC
Jan 2011 Initial WG draft on advanced DNS server selection solution
Jan 2011 Initial WG draft on MIF API extension.
Jun 2011 Submit DHCPv6 routing configuration option to IESG for publication as a Proposed Standard RFC
Nov 2011 Submit advanced DNS server selection solution to IESG for publication as a Proposed Standard RFC
Nov 2011 Submit MIF API extension solution to IESG for publication as an Informational RFC
 End of changes. 4 change blocks. 
15 lines changed or deleted 39 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.32. The latest version is available from http://www.levkowetz.com/ietf/tools/rfcdiff/