There was already a half-way animated discussion whether we should carry VxLAN natively ;-)
Just saying … And IMO IETF review would work … --- tony <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> spake: On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 9:27 AM, Eric C Rosen <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: On 10/16/2017 8:01 PM, Alia Atlas wrote: I don't believe that a document has to be Standards Track to create a registry that will require Standards Track going forward. It is a bit unusual, but I don't see a process problem. If our documents get converted to Standards Track, this won't be a problem. But if they stay Experimental for an extended period of time, an issue could arise the next time we need to allocate a codepoint. ("Since you have no Standards Track documents, we can't allow you to register any codepoints in registries with "Standards Action" policy.) So we might want a registration policy that will allow codepoint allocations to be done in Experimental track documents that are accepted by the WG. Maybe we should change the registration policy to "IETF Review". That seems to be almost the same as Standard Action, but does not require Standards Track documents. And it is still eligible for Early Allocation. True enough. That could work as well. I don't see near-term updates to the Next Protocol registry as very likely, but I'd be fine with this approach. Regards, Alia
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
