Iana sect looks good (but i will review lcaf parts in another email). One nit though: Sect 14, change ietf consensus to ietf review. The term changed in rfc 5226.
Jari Dino Farinacci <[email protected]> wrote: >> I'm not sure if we have seen a response, but I also don't think it is hard >> to develop the text for this. This one needs to go in, because otherwise we >> don't know how to manage the name spaces. It is a potential Discuss item >> from the other ADs or even IANA if the process isn't clear. Here's a >> strawman text: >> >> IANA should create a registry for managing the new namespaces within the >> LISP protocol. This registry contains initially the following two new >> namespaces. >> >> o New LISP Type values (Section 6.1.1) can be allocated through IETF Review >> or IESG Approval <xref target="RFC5226"/>. Six values have already been >> allocated by this specification (Section 6.1.1). >> >> o New ACT values (Section 6.1.4) can be allocated through IETEF Review or >> IESG Approval. Four values have already been allocated by this specification >> (Section 6.1.4). >> >> In addition, the LISP protocol has a number of flag and reserved fields, >> such as the LISP header flags field (Section 5.3). New bits for flags can be >> taken into use from these fields through IETF Review or IESG Approval, but >> these need not be managed by IANA. > >So see the enclosed changes to the IANA section. I think it is a good >compromise. > >Dino > > > > _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
