Hi Alvaro, Many thanks for the review and the remarks.
I added the PCEP SR extension to the document version -09 which I haven't published yet. Here the diff http://www.ietf.org//rfcdiff?url1=https://raw.githubusercontent.com/graf3net/draft-tgraf-ipfix-mpls-sr-label-type/master/draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-mpls-sr-label-type-08.txt&url2=https://raw.githubusercontent.com/graf3net/draft-tgraf-ipfix-mpls-sr-label-type/master/draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-mpls-sr-label-type-09.txt I would appreciate Alvaro, Rob and Med for a quick review and let me know when I should publish the update. Regarding the second remark. Updating the "Additional Information" in the IPFIX Information Elements registry for mplsTopLabelType. Throughout the process we had a lengthy exchange with IANA and the IE doctors what the best course of action is since "Additional Information" is not publicly visible. We came to the conclusion that this is addressed best by adding the RFC which is describing the code point to the "Reference" column. I could add an IANA remark that for the existing entries in mplsTopLabelType, the RFC references described in "Additional Information" could be moved to the reference column. Let me know your thoughts. I will then double check with Med, IANA and the IE doctors if they support and update the document. +-------+--------------------------------+----------------------+ | Value | Description | Reference | +-------+--------------------------------+----------------------+ | TBD1 | Path Computation Element | [RFC-to-be], RFC8664 | +-------+--------------------------------+----------------------+ | TBD2 | OSPFv2 Segment Routing | [RFC-to-be], RFC8665 | +-------+--------------------------------+----------------------+ | TBD3 | OSPFv3 Segment Routing | [RFC-to-be], RFC8666 | +-------+--------------------------------+----------------------+ | TBD4 | IS-IS Segment Routing | [RFC-to-be], RFC8667 | +-------+--------------------------------+----------------------+ | TBD5 | BGP Segment Routing Prefix-SID | [RFC-to-be], RFC8669 | +-------+--------------------------------+----------------------+ Best wishes Thomas -----Original Message----- From: Alvaro Retana via Datatracker <nore...@ietf.org> Sent: Friday, September 3, 2021 9:04 PM To: The IESG <i...@ietf.org> Cc: draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-mpls-sr-label-t...@ietf.org; opsawg-cha...@ietf.org; opsawg@ietf.org; mohamed.boucad...@orange.com Subject: Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-mpls-sr-label-type-08: (with COMMENT) Alvaro Retana has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-mpls-sr-label-type-08: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fiesg%2Fstatement%2Fdiscuss-criteria.html&data=04%7C01%7CThomas.Graf%40swisscom.com%7Ce0245989d4ce40d0cded08d96f0da6d6%7C364e5b87c1c7420d9beec35d19b557a1%7C0%7C0%7C637662926682829654%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=XSxsFdRPCgH0dL4e8E5lOzCyxAfwby7bsN5JAJEjAYM%3D&reserved=0 for more information about DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fdraft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-mpls-sr-label-type%2F&data=04%7C01%7CThomas.Graf%40swisscom.com%7Ce0245989d4ce40d0cded08d96f0da6d6%7C364e5b87c1c7420d9beec35d19b557a1%7C0%7C0%7C637662926682829654%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=K16zrTMek0EkKVRNsGdkscWbkFIj46E0RBoJKZKDgAw%3D&reserved=0 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) The SR labels can also be programmed by a PCE (rfc8664). For completeness, it would be very nice if a codepoint was also allocated for that. (2) The "Additional Information" field in the IPFIX Information Elements registry includes information about mplsTopLabelType that will now be incomplete -- it currently says: See [RFC3031] for the MPLS label structure. See [RFC4364] for the association of MPLS labels with Virtual Private Networks (VPNs). See [RFC4271] for BGP and BGP routing. See [RFC5036] for Label Distribution Protocol (LDP). See the list of MPLS label types assigned by IANA at [https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.iana.org%2Fassignments%2Fmpls-label-values&data=04%7C01%7CThomas.Graf%40swisscom.com%7Ce0245989d4ce40d0cded08d96f0da6d6%7C364e5b87c1c7420d9beec35d19b557a1%7C0%7C0%7C637662926682839611%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=KtTnUkKoMvpK8KL2dKTz01%2F3x3PgTZC%2B%2FwM8eIbv84M%3D&reserved=0]. It would be nice to add information here about the new fields.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
