Done.

Dino

On Oct 30, 2011, at 11:34 PM, Jari Arkko wrote:

> 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

Reply via email to