Dear Sheng,

I have tried to whip up below the necessary information for the WG chair to AD 
approval request
according to RFC7120. As the non-author co-chair, please check if you approve 
and proceed accordingly.

Thanks
   Toerless (for the authors of draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane)

---

From: [email protected]
To: [email protected], [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: OPS-ADs: request for IANA early allocation of codepoints for 
draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane

Dear Rob, Warren

For the ANIMA chairs, i hereby request your approval according to RFC7120, 
section 3.1, point 4,
for IANA early allocation of the below described 2 code points to be assigned to
draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane.

According to RFC7120, section 3.1, point 2, the conditions for early allocation 
are met.

Code point (1)
 Registry: 
https://www.iana.org/assignments/smi-numbers/smi-numbers.xhtml#smi-numbers-1.3.6.1.5.5.7.0
 Requested Description: id-mod-anima-acpnodename-2020
 RFC7120, section 2 conditions for early allocation:
  (a) "Specification Required", will be published as RFC
      Expert: Russ Housley
  (b) specification adequately described in 
      draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane-27, section 6.1.2/6.1.2.1
  (c) Specification is stable:
      No backward compatibility issue introduced by this code-point.
  (d) Request by implementors for interop testing and question to WG
      has determined that there is sufficient interest in the community
      for early allocation.
 No depletion issue in this registry
      

Code point (2)
 Registry: 
https://www.iana.org/assignments/smi-numbers/smi-numbers.xhtml#smi-numbers-1.3.6.1.5.5.7.8
 Description: id-mod-anima-acpnodename-2020
 Requested Description: id-on-AcpNodeName
  (a) "Specification Required", will be published as RFC
      Expert: Russ Housley
  (b) specification adequately described in 
      draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane-27, section 6.1.2/6.1.2.1
  (c) Specification is stable: N/A:
      N/A: No prior approved spec for this functionality.
      Prior draft proposed code point (rfc822Name):
      - Not used in production deployments:
      - Rejected by IESG for > 1 year,
      - Backward compatibility undesirable by IESG, WG and draft authors 
(undesirable complexity).
  (d) Request by implementors for interop testing and question to WG
      has determined that there is sufficient interest in the community
      for early allocation.
 No depletion issue in this registry

For the ANIMA chairs
    Sheng Jiang

_______________________________________________
Anima mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima

Reply via email to