Re: Last Call: <draft-bonica-special-purpose-03.txt> (Special-Purpose Address Registries) to Best Current Practice

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

 



I see Ron has gotten back to Geoff and posted a new version of his document. Since I've already stuck my nose out with questions before, I might as well do so again. (For the record, my DISCUSS on another document and the DISCUSS of me and a couple of others on another document is what motivated Ron to write this one, so I feel a bit of responsibility to make sure this gets done.)

So, some questions for SM:

On 11/29/12 9:22 PM, SM wrote:

BCP 153 is about Special Use IPv4 addresses. This intended BCP will create a mishmash as the draft covers both IPv4 and IPv6. I suggest handling the IP versions in two separate drafts.

I haven't seen anyone jump out of the woodwork in support of splitting the document, and the document we've got on the table does it this way. Do you think this is important enough to stop the document?

RFC 5375 is being obsoleted by this draft. RFC 6598 updates RFC 5375. Could someone explain that to me (see http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=5375&eid=3309 and the relevant discussion for details)?

I think you've confused the documents. It's 5735, not 5375. So I take it this is not relevant, correct?

The following text is from RFC 3330 which was written by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority:

  "Throughout its entire history, the Internet has employed a central
   Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) responsible for the
   allocation and assignment of various identifiers needed for the
   operation of the Internet [RFC1174].  In the case of the IPv4 address
   space, the IANA allocates parts of the address space to Regional
   Internet Registries according to their established needs.  These
   Regional Internet Registries are responsible for the assignment of
   IPv4 addresses to operators and users of the Internet within their
   regions.

   [paragraph omitted]

   On an ongoing basis, the IANA has been designated by the IETF to make
   assignments in support of the Internet Standards Process [RFC2860].
   Section 4 of this document describes that assignment process."

The text was also present in RFC 5735. I unfortunately have to object to the disappearance of that text.

This document does not change 2860 and it doesn't change 1174. So this policy associated with this text is still in place, whether or not we repeat the above paragraphs. Putting this text in seems unimportant and I haven't seen support to do so. Can you explain how important this objection is? Again, do you see this as a reason not to go forward?

RFC 5736 provides direction to IANA concerning the creation and management of the IANA IPv4 Special Purpose Address Registry. The information in RFC 5375 is not obsolete.

We do want 5735 to be obsolete because it is no longer the authoritative list of addresses; the registry is. So I think you got that part wrong. But you may have a point about *also* obsoleting 5736. I'll leave that one to Ron and Ralph.

From the IANA Considerations Section:

Ron updated this to:

   IANA will update the aforementioned registries as requested in the
   "IANA Considerations" section of an IETF reviewed document.  The
   "IANA Considerations" section must include all of the information
   specified in Section 2.1 of this document.


RFC 5735 mentions that:

  "Among other things, [RFC2860] requires that protocol parameters be
   assigned according to the criteria and procedures specified in
   RFCs, including Proposed, Draft, and full Internet Standards and
   Best Current Practice documents, and any other RFC that calls for
   IANA assignment."

This draft changes it.

I don't understand what you mean here. Are you suggesting that this document updates 2860, or somehow changes something in 2860? It does not AFAICT. Please explain.

pr

--
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - +1 (858)651-4478



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