Carsten Bormann <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 26. Oct 2021, at 20:57, Michael Richardson <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> Here is an example of a LINKTYPE that would be very difficult to explain if >> it weren't in the context of a pcap/pcapng file.
> β¦
>> LINKTYPE_USB_LINUX_MMAPPED 220
>> USB packets, beginning with a Linux USB header, as specified by the
>> struct usbmon_packet in the Documentation/usb/usbmon.txt file in the
> β¦
> Whether that is a good registry entry is for the designated expert (DE)
> to decide, not for the IESG.
The document in question would have to establish the history of the entries.
The IESG will ask questions about this part. It will happen.
> The third document would establish the registry and maybe provide a few
> entries so the IESG has some examples to look at.
Not a few entries, all of the history of them.
> Loading that registry is then done via IANA and the DE.
No, that's now how it's worked in the past, and now what IANA told me.
>> Maybe we can eliminate all of the pcap->pcapng normative references.
> Yes, please!
> (Having a normative reference to a HISTORIC document is a bit weird,
anyway.)
I don't see why.
anyway, if the WG wants to go this way, then I'd ask the chairs to judge.
--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]> . o O ( IPv6 IΓΈT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
