Re: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay-10

["Ali Sajassi (sajassi)" <sajassi@xxxxxxxxx>]

 

As requested, added a note in the IANA section.

 

Cheers,

Ali

 

From: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Friday, December 22, 2017 at 5:34 AM
To: Vijay Gurbani <vkg@xxxxxxx>, "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay.all@xxxxxxxx" <draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay.all@xxxxxxxx>
Cc: "bess@xxxxxxxx" <bess@xxxxxxxx>, "ietf@xxxxxxxx" <ietf@xxxxxxxx>, "gen-art@xxxxxxxx" <gen-art@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay-10
Resent-From: <alias-bounces@xxxxxxxx>
Resent-To: Cisco Employee <sajassi@xxxxxxxxx>, <jdrake@xxxxxxxxxxx>, <nabil.bitar@xxxxxxxxx>, <rshekhar@xxxxxxxxxxx>, <uttaro@xxxxxxx>, <wim.henderickx@xxxxxxxxx>, <stephane.litkowski@xxxxxxxxxx>, <martin.vigoureux@xxxxxxxxx>, <aretana.ietf@xxxxxxxxx>, <db3546@xxxxxxx>, <akatlas@xxxxxxxxx>, Thomas Morin <thomas.morin@xxxxxxxxxx>, <thomas.morin@xxxxxxxxxx>
Resent-Date: Friday, December 22, 2017 at 5:34 AM

 

Vijay:

 

Hi!

 

Thanks for your review!

 

The registry has a FCFS registration policy, so at some point in the life of draft-sd-l2vpn-evpn-overlay the code points were requested — not necessarily in the draft itself.

 

Even though draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay is tagged in the datatracker to have replaced draft-sd-l2vpn-evpn-overlay, I think you make a good point in that the registry needs to be updated with the current/correct information.

 

Authors:  Please add a note in the IANA Considerations Section to have the reference in the registry point to this document.

 

Thanks!

 

Alvaro.

 

On December 21, 2017 at 9:16:53 AM, Vijay Gurbani (vkg@xxxxxxx) wrote:

Minor issues: 
In S13 (IANA Considerations), I am not sure whether this draft is allocating 
the tunnel types or not. The responsible IANA registry [0] shows that the 
tunnel types mentioned in this draft are already allocated through a precursor 
individual draft [1], which has long expired. However, when I look at the IANA 
Consideration section in [1], it is empty! So I am not sure how the IANA 
registry in [0] received the allocations. I think the IANA section of this 
draft needs to be updated accordingly. 

[0] 
https://www.iana.org/assignments/bgp-parameters/bgp-parameters.xhtml#tunnel-types 
[1] http://www.iana.org/go/draft-sd-l2vpn-evpn-overlay (the expired individual 
draft itself is at https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-sd-l2vpn-evpn-overlay-03)