Hi Ketan,
See in-line.
Regards,
Dan
On Thu, Nov 7, 2024 at 3:27 PM Ketan Talaulikar <ketant.ietf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> 1. Section 6.10 includes:
>
> > Note to IANA (RFC editor to remove this before publication): The new
> registry creation request below is also present in the draft-ietf-
> pce-segment-routing-policy-cp. IANA is requested to process the
> registry creation via the first of these two documents to reach
> publication stage and the authors of the other document would update
> the IANA considerations suitably.
>
> As I understand, if this document reaches publication before
> draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp, Section 6.6 of the latest will be
> removed, and the opposite. However, the tables are not identical. In Table 10,
> Section 6.10 in this document values 5-255 are Unassigned, while in Section 6.6
> of draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp values 5-255 are Reserved.
KT> We say "... and the authors of the other document would *update*
the IANA considerations suitably." - so we won't be removing section
6.6 of this document. We'll do what is correct/needful under guidance
from the IANA team. If there is a different/better way to deal with
such "race conditions", we are open to adapt.
My concern was not about the "race conditions" which I am sure IANA will know how to deal with, but with the fact that the two tables are not identical.
while
in Section 6.6 of draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp values 5-255 are Reserved.
'Unassigned' and 'Reserved' is not the same thing. You need to make these two consistent.
-- last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx
