EXTENDED Last Call: draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-client-link-layer-addr-opt-04.txt (Client Link-layer Address Option in DHCPv6) to Proposed Standard
The IESG has received a request from the Dynamic Host Configuration WG (dhc) to consider the following document: - 'Client Link-layer Address Option in DHCPv6' draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-client-link-layer-addr-opt-04.txt as Proposed Standard The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the i...@ietf.org mailing lists by 2013-02-28. Exceptionally, comments may be sent to i...@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. Note that this is an extension of the IETF last call that was originally announced on 2013-02-04. The IETF last call has been extended because of IPR disclosure 1710, which was published in reference to draft-halwasia-dhc-dhcpv6-hardware-addr-opt-00.txt. Because draft-halwasia-dhc-dhcpv6-hardware-addr-opt-00.txt is a predecessor to draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-client-link-layer-addr-opt-04.txt, IPR disclosure 1710 should be considered in this IETF last call. Abstract This document specifies the format and mechanism that is to be used for encoding client link-layer address in DHCPv6 Relay-Forward messages by defining a new DHCPv6 Client Link-layer Address option. The file can be obtained via http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-client-link-layer-addr-opt/ IESG discussion can be tracked via http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-client-link-layer-addr-opt/ballot/ IPR disclosure 1710 may be relevant to this document.
RFC 6872 on The Common Log Format (CLF) for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP): Framework and Information Model
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 6872 Title: The Common Log Format (CLF) for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP): Framework and Information Model Author: V. Gurbani, Ed., E. Burger, Ed., T. Anjali, H. Abdelnur, O. Festor Status: Standards Track Stream: IETF Date: February 2013 Mailbox:v...@bell-labs.com, ebur...@standardstrack.com, tri...@ece.iit.edu, hum...@gmail.com, olivier.fes...@loria.fr Pages: 39 Characters: 72134 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag:draft-ietf-sipclf-problem-statement-13.txt URL:http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6872.txt Well-known web servers such as Apache and web proxies like Squid support event logging using a common log format. The logs produced using these de facto standard formats are invaluable to system administrators for troubleshooting a server and tool writers to craft tools that mine the log files and produce reports and trends. Furthermore, these log files can also be used to train anomaly detection systems and feed events into a security event management system. The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) does not have a common log format, and, as a result, each server supports a distinct log format that makes it unnecessarily complex to produce tools to do trend analysis and security detection. This document describes a framework, including requirements and analysis of existing approaches, and specifies an information model for development of a SIP common log file format that can be used uniformly by user agents, proxies, registrars, and redirect servers as well as back-to-back user agents. This document is a product of the SIP Common Log Format Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Proposed Standard. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community,and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the Internet Official Protocol Standards (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists. To subscribe or unsubscribe, see http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce http://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist For searching the RFC series, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfcsearch.html. For downloading RFCs, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html. Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. The RFC Editor Team Association Management Solutions, LLC
RFC 6873 on Format for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Common Log Format (CLF)
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 6873 Title: Format for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Common Log Format (CLF) Author: G. Salgueiro, V. Gurbani, A. B. Roach Status: Standards Track Stream: IETF Date: February 2013 Mailbox:gsalg...@cisco.com, v...@bell-labs.com, a...@nostrum.com Pages: 28 Characters: 63449 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag:draft-ietf-sipclf-format-11.txt URL:http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6873.txt The SIPCLF working group has defined a Common Log Format (CLF) framework for Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) servers. This CLF mimics the successful event logging format found in well-known web servers like Apache and web proxies like Squid. This document proposes an indexed text encoding format for the SIP CLF that retains the key advantages of a text-based format while significantly increasing processing performance over a purely text-based implementation. This file format adheres to the SIP CLF information model and provides an effective encoding scheme for all mandatory and optional fields that appear in a SIP CLF record. This document is a product of the SIP Common Log Format Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Proposed Standard. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community,and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the Internet Official Protocol Standards (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists. To subscribe or unsubscribe, see http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce http://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist For searching the RFC series, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfcsearch.html. For downloading RFCs, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html. Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. The RFC Editor Team Association Management Solutions, LLC
RFC 6868 on Parameter Value Encoding in iCalendar and vCard
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 6868 Title: Parameter Value Encoding in iCalendar and vCard Author: C. Daboo Status: Standards Track Stream: IETF Date: February 2013 Mailbox:cy...@daboo.name Pages: 7 Characters: 11025 Updates:RFC5545, RFC6321, RFC6350, RFC6351 I-D Tag:draft-daboo-ical-vcard-parameter-encoding-04.txt URL:http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6868.txt This specification updates the data formats for iCalendar (RFC 5545) and vCard (RFC 6350) to allow parameter values to include certain characters forbidden by the existing specifications. This is now a Proposed Standard. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community,and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the Internet Official Protocol Standards (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists. To subscribe or unsubscribe, see http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce http://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist For searching the RFC series, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfcsearch.html. For downloading RFCs, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html. Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. The RFC Editor Team Association Management Solutions, LLC
