On 24 Aug 2017, at 11:24, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote:
For 1, 2, 6, and 7, that's easy; the drafts defining the values can
do
the registrations. For 5, the reference would be to an existing RFC
that doesn't do the registration. I'm not sure what to do about
that;
perhaps register it here and make the reference both 5640 and this
document.
Actually, this document does assign these code points in the registry
so
“This document” is appropriate. The value portion of these TLVs
just
happened to be described via a reference rather than text.
There is nothing preventing the IANA registry from having useful
information. :-) Yes, this document registers it, but really what the
implementer is going to need is this document *and* 5640, so I see no
particular harm in putting both references in the registry, and it's
probably useful.
pr
--
Pete Resnick <http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - +1 (858)651-4478
_______________________________________________
OSPF mailing list
OSPF@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
