IE-doctors already looked at this under [IANA #1240167] and [IANA #1263583].
I've reviewed draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-srv6-srh-08 and -09 which appeared during
the review window.
(Editors, please don't move the goalposts while reviews are in progress!)
3. New SRv6 IPFIX Information Elements
The definitions in section 3 are inconsistent with the "IANA Considerations" in
section 5. Sometimes there is more detail in one section or the other. Section
3 claims "This section specifies the new SRv6 IPFIX IEs." yet section 5 will
update IANA's registry - so these two sections must be consistent. Please
either use the exact same words in both sections, or entirely remove the
duplicate definitions in section 3.
5. Note to the RFC-Editor:
I would put this note right at the top, immediately after the section 5
header, and not after table 1.
5.1 srhFlagsIPv6 / Additional Information
Remove the space from the URL: /ipv6- parameters/
5.* / Additional Information
In each case, please mention the specific section of the RFC. eg "See
section 2 of RFC8754".
5.5. srhSegmentIPv6BasicList / Description
"segment list" versus "Segment List" ?
5.7. srhSegmentsIPv6Left / Description
8-bit unsigned integer defining the number of segments
remaining to reach the end of the segment list from the SRH, as
specified by the "Segments Left" field in Section 4.4 of
[RFC8200<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8200>]
and mentioned part of the SRH in Section 2 of
[RFC8754<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8754>]).
Consider "from" -> "in" and removing "part of the SRH" ?
5.9.1 Subregistry
Who will be the expert reviewers for the sub-registry? Is it IE-doctors, or
SRH-experts, or another group?
5.10. srhSegmentIPv6LocatorLength / Description
The period has been lost from "SRv6 Locator."
5.11 srhSegmentIPv6EndpointBehavior / Additional Information
"Section 4 of RFC8986." has been added with no context. eg consider:
Additional Information: See section 4 of RFC8986 and the "SRV6 Endpoint
Behavior" registry at
https://www.iana.org/assignments/segment-routing/segment-routing.xhtml#srv6-endpoint-behaviors.
Also minor editorial comments:
"as series of octets" appears several times. Is "series" is plural, or
should it be "as a series of octets" ?
7. Implementation Status
I would put this section in an appendix to avoid the need to renumber
sections 8, 9, and 10 when this is removed.
P.
On 03/05/2023 00:08, David Dong via RT wrote:
Dear IE Doctors (cc: opsawg WG),
As the designated experts for the IPFIX Information Elements registry, can you
review the proposed registration in draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-srv6-srh for us?
Please see
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-srv6-srh/__;!!OSsGDw!Olm5L_aWqtbpGyxypC2dvr2pJ8APDlZbByuYeEV-WilsP91koTwzwOeZ8QMgLIkwPKxegSjgXszfsyzTIbeaC8w$
[datatracker[.]ietf[.]org]
The due date is May 16th, 2023.
If this is OK, when the IESG approves the document for publication, we'll make
the registration at:
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.iana.org/assignments/ipfix/__;!!OSsGDw!Olm5L_aWqtbpGyxypC2dvr2pJ8APDlZbByuYeEV-WilsP91koTwzwOeZ8QMgLIkwPKxegSjgXszfsyzTCddpnzE$
[iana[.]org]
We will assume that your response is a consensus response, unless you tell us
otherwise.
With thanks,
David Dong
IANA Services Specialist
_______________________________________________
ie-doctors mailing list
ie-doct...@ietf.org<mailto:ie-doct...@ietf.org>
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ie-doctors__;!!OSsGDw!Olm5L_aWqtbpGyxypC2dvr2pJ8APDlZbByuYeEV-WilsP91koTwzwOeZ8QMgLIkwPKxegSjgXszfsyzTYbMT-j4$
[ietf[.]org]
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
