1. “Softwire Hub & Spoke L2TPv2 Framework” Update draft-ietf-softwire-hs-framework-l2tpv2
Carlos Pignataro
Bruno Stevant
Jean-Francois Tremblay
Bill Storer
Maria Alice Dos Santos
IETF 74, March 2009, San Francisco, CA, USA

2. Goals
This is an update on the details of the latest document changes (from -10 to -12)
Status
Document currently in IESG Evaluation
Updates
Document entered Publication Requested at revision -10
Initially 4 DISCUSS positions and some COMMENTs
Produced rev -11 and rev -12
Currently, 2 DISCUSSes: Ops (1 out of 3 issues) and Sec

3. Revision 10 -> 11 Throughout the doc Section 2.1 “NATs”
Review some lowercase RFC2119 words
Section 2.1 “NATs”
Clarified L2TPv2 address selection behavior effect on NAT filtering types (added new paragraph)
Section “Tunnel Establishment”
Rewordings to clarify Required vs. Optional AVPs
Added explicit definition of “Required” and “Optional” AVPs from RFC2661, previously implicit
Added explanation of why the doc says L2TPv2 AVPs “SHOULD NOT” be hidden (added 1 para)

4. Revision 10 -> 11 (cont)
Section “Additional L2TPv2 Considerations”
New single-paragraph section, with UDP Design Guidelines considerations from [RFC5405]
Section 9 “Considerations for Maintenance and Statistics”
Paragraph explicitly allowing informational protocol elements

5. Revision 10 -> 11 (cont) Section 10 “Security Considerations”
Explicitly Allow other auth protocols, already in Section (just mention also in Security Considerations)
Explicit mention of AVP hiding, already in the doc. (just mention also in Security Considerations)
Editorials
Pointer to “voluntary tunneling” description
Added Abbreviations
Removed the acronym “OAM”
Updated references

6. Revision 11 -> 12 Section 4 “Standardization Status”
Re-Title “References to standardization documents”
Initial paragraph explaining context for the Section
Section 5 “Softwire Establishment”
Added the optional Ipsec / IKEv1 Step to Figures 9 and 10

7. Revision 11 -> 12 (cont) Section 10 “Security Considerations”
More Verbose description of applicable and additional Security Considerations
More explicit reference to IPsec procedures:
IKEv1: “[RFC3193] MUST be supported” (deployed technology must be very strongly considered [RFC4925])
IKEv2: softwire-security-requirements solution “needs to be considered for future phases”
Editorials
Use "Hub and Spoke“ throughout the doc

8. WIP for Rev -13
Clarifications on Section 8, “Considerations about RADIUS Integration”

9. EOF
Thanks !