[Last-Call] Re: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-idr-sr-policy-safi-09

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Dan,

I missed that part during my own "consistency check" between these two
drafts. Thanks for catching that!

I will raise this comments to the authors of
draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy document on the last-call that
is also ongoing in parallel.

The intention here is "unassigned" and not "reserved".

Thanks,
Ketan


On Thu, Nov 7, 2024 at 3:11 PM Dan Romascanu <dromasca@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> 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.
> in 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.
>
> '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




[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux