Authors,
While reviewing this document during AUTH48, please resolve (as necessary) the
following questions, which are also in the source file.
1) <!-- [rfced] We are having trouble parsing this text. Please consider
whether
the suggested text conveys the intended meaning. We suggest moving "also" to
clarify they PEN holders are allocated an additional range.
Original:
The present specification employs these SID allocation mechanisms to
allocate ranges with 100 000 SIDs (representation size 64 bits) each
for each of the holders of IANA-registered Private Enterprise Numbers
(PENs) < 1 000 000, as well as ranges with 10 000 SIDs
(representation size 32 bits) each for each of the holders of PENs <
100 000.
Perhaps:
The present specification employs these SID allocation mechanisms to
allocate ranges of 100 000 SIDs (representation size 64 bits)
to each IANA Private Enterprise Number (PEN) holder of a value
between 100 000 and 1 000 000. Per this document, PEN holders of
values smaller than 100 000 are also allocated ranges of 10 000 SIDs
(representation size 32 bits).
-->
2) <!-- [rfced] Perhaps the "Example" section title could be more descriptive?
Original:
2. Example
Perhaps:
2. Example of SID Range Assignment for PEN 32473
-->
3) <!-- [rfced] To highlight the PEN number in the SID range, we suggest the
following update for clarity, rather than relying on a feature that displays
differently in the various outputs:
Original:
* 3*03 247 3*00 000 up to 3*03 247 3*99 999, and
* 3 *324 73*0 000 up to 3 *324 73*9 999.
(The plaintext form of this document shows "*" characters around the
digits conveying the PEN, which are shown in *boldface* in the
typographic forms.)
Perhaps:
* 303 247 300 000 up to 303 247 399 999
(where "032473" are the digits conveying the PEN)
* 3 324 730 000 up to 3 324 739 999
(where "32473" are the digits conveying the PEN)
If not, we suggest updating this text to refer to "other typographic forms" or
specify the HTML and PDF, because "typographic" seemingly includes the TXT file.
Original:
(The plaintext form of this document shows "*" characters around the
digits conveying the PEN, which are shown in *boldface* in the
typographic forms.)
-->
4) <!-- [rfced] As we believe "this allocation" refers to the broader allocation
of 100 000 and 10 000 SID ranges to PEN holders and does not refer to the
example specified in the preceding section, we suggest updating the text for
clarity. Please clarify "employing this number space" - does it mean use of
SID values from these ranges?
Original:
This allocation provides an extremely-low-threshold (zero-
interaction) way for PEN holders to get number space for the YANG
SIDs used in their YANG modules. If a PEN is not already available
to the entity needing such number space, it can be obtained in a very
low-threshold process. Employing this number space is, however, not
always the approach to recommend to a module author:
* In the larger of the two spaces, each SID number needs a
...
Perhaps:
Allocation of the two mega-ranges provides PEN holders with an
extremely-low-threshold (zero-
interaction) way to get a number space for the YANG
SIDs used in their YANG modules. If a PEN is not already available
to the entity needing such a number space, it can be obtained through a very
low-threshold process. However, use of values in these mega-ranges is not
always the recommended approach for a module author:
* In the larger of the two spaces, each SID number needs a
...
-->
5) <!-- [rfced] May we update "< 100 000" for clarity?
Original:
* For the holders of PENs < 100 000, there additionally is a smaller
space where each SID number needs a representation size of 32 bits
("32-bit SIDs"). PEN numbers that have access to this space (PEN
< 100 000) are likely to run out before or around 2040; the
expectation is that by that time there will be enough
opportunities to request SID ranges within mega-ranges allocated
by other registrants that this mechanism is less needed.
Perhaps:
* For the holders of PENs with values less than 100 000 in the
"Private Enterprise Numbers (PENs)" registry, there is an another smaller
space because each SID number needs a representation size of 32 bits
("32-bit SIDs"). By or around 2040, the PENs with a value less than
100 000 are likely to be exhausted; the expectation is that there will be
enough opportunities by that time to request SID ranges within mega-ranges
already allocated by other registrants that this mechanism is less needed.
-->
6) <!-- [rfced] We suggest updating "This space" for clarity. Perhaps "This
process" or "This document"?
Original:
* This space has no infrastructure to discover the YANG module
behind a SID.
Perhaps A:
* This process does not have an infrastructure to discover the YANG module
behind a SID.
Perhaps B:
* This document does not define infrastructure to discover the YANG module
behind a SID.
-->
7) <!-- [rfced] To provide the reader with more information, we suggest the
following update:
Original:
- Implementations that employ PEN-based SIDs can facilitate
information discovery by providing [I-D.ietf-core-yang-library]
or another form of YANG library [RFC8525].
Perhaps:
- Implementations that employ PEN-based SIDs can facilitate
information discovery by providing a constrained version of
the YANG library [core-yang-library]
or another form of YANG library [RFC8525].
-->
8) <!-- [rfced] Would you like to clarify the figurative use of "land grab"
here?
Original:
Relying on the PEN registry might theoretically trigger a land-grab
by prospective writers of YANG modules.
Perhaps:
Relying on the PEN registry might theoretically trigger a land grab
(of PEN assignments) by prospective writers of YANG modules.
-->
9) <!-- [rfced] Note that we have removed #links per IANA's preference. We also
added a list to introduce the mega ranges. Please review and let us know if
any updates are needed. -->
10) <!--[rfced] Regarding preventing line breaks within numbers, we see that
NARROW NO-BREAK SPACE (U+202F) was used within numbers in the original.
In RFCs, non-breaking space (U+00A0) has been used to prevent line
breaks; do you want to use that? An example of where preventing line
breaks may be desired:
Current:
The management of each SID block of 100 000 SIDs, ranging from 3pp
ppp p00 000 to 3pp ppp p99 999, is delegated to the PEN holder for
PEN ppp ppp (i.e., the PEN holder for ppp ppp controls SID 3pp ppp
p00 000 to 3pp ppp p99 999).
Perhaps:
The management of each SID block of 100 000 SIDs, ranging from
3pp ppp p00 000 to 3pp ppp p99 999, is delegated to the PEN holder for
PEN ppp ppp (i.e., the PEN holder for ppp ppp controls SID
3pp ppp p00 000 to 3pp ppp p99 999)
-->
Thank you.
Sandy Ginoza and Alice Russo
RFC Production Center
On Jun 2, 2026, [email protected] wrote:
RFC Author(s):
Your document is now ready for Final Review (previously AUTH48).
The document was edited in kramdown-rfc as part of the RPC pilot test (see
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=pilot_test_kramdown_rfc).
Please review the procedures for your review using kramdown-rfc:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=pilot_test_instructions_completing_auth48_using_kramdown
Once the review is complete, it will be published as an RFC.
Files
-----
The files are available here:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9997.md
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9997.html
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9997.pdf
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9997.txt
Diff file of the text:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9997-diff.html
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9997-rfcdiff.html (side by side)
Diff of the kramdown:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9997-md-diff.html
https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9997-md-rfcdiff.html (side by side)
Tracking progress
-----------------
The details about Final Review are here:
https://queue.rfc-editor.org/final-review/rfc9997/
Please let us know if you have any questions.
Thank you for your cooperation,
RFC Editor
--
auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
