-----้‚ฎไปถๅŽŸไปถ-----
ๅ‘ไปถไบบ: Carsten Bormann [mailto:[email protected]] 
ๅ‘้€ๆ—ถ้—ด: 2021ๅนด10ๆœˆ26ๆ—ฅ 15:18
ๆ”ถไปถไบบ: Guy Harris <[email protected]>
ๆŠ„้€: Qin Wu <[email protected]>; [email protected]
ไธป้ข˜: Re: [OPSAWG] ๐Ÿ”” WG Adoption Call for draft-gharris-opsawg-pcap-02

On 26. Oct 2021, at 09:00, Guy Harris <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> I would vote for "both should point to a common location" so that neither the 
> pcap nor the pcapng spec says "there is *the* list of link-layer types" - it 
> points to a registry, and as more types are added to the registry, more specs 
> can be published define them.

Indeed, and running such a registry is exactly what IANA is good at.

One way to do this would be to jump-start the process by a short document 
establishing this registry, with a defined registration policy.
(Weโ€™d probably need to be able to point out candidates for the designated 
experts that will implement this policy to make this approach palatable to 
IESG.)

[Qin] Good proposal, agree with this.
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

Reply via email to