Hi Oscar.
Sorry for the late response, I have overlooked the part directed to the
chairs.
Even if suboptimal from the implementer's point of view, the usual
procedure is codepoint allocation during RFC publication. Anyway, a
process for early allocation is defined: as such, it is not a "special
case" (a case without defined procedure would be), but not the
mainstream procedure either.
To correct one of your statement below, a WG I-D is owned by a WG.
Requesting early allocation, as taking strong decisions related to a WG
I-D, needs WG consensus (i.e. more than authors' decision). So far, no
consensus for early allocation has been reached...
Back to this particular I-D, suggested values are already out-dated and
I am not sure a sudden "early" (or rather "late, but before RFC")
allocation would bring much value at this stage. (But we may miss some
information there.)
Regards,
Julien
Sep. 05, 2014 - OSCAR GONZALEZ DE DIOS:
Hi Fatai,
>
> It is crystal clear that when the document becomes an RFC, IANA will
> assign the correct number.
>
> In my humble opinion, requesting for the early allocation is not “a
> special case”, but the normal procedure that should be followed
> (obviously, it is not the traditional way to do things), approved by
> IANA, so early implementations of stable documents have a code point
> that has no clashes. Furthermore, early allocated code points are
> maintained in the IANA registry. Traditional way of adding the
> “suggested value” in the IANA section in the draft has led to many
> problems. We even have a very recent case where a value used in a
> draft with early implementations has forced a value in an RFC with
> less implementations to change.
>
> Summing up, I see absolutely no reason not to ask for the early
> allocation, in this particular draft, and in all stable drafts in the
> working group. I the particular case of this drafts, the suggested
> values of the new objects are the same ones are values used in
> existing RFCs, complicating the interoperability.
>
> In any case, requesting the early allocation is a decision to be
> taken by the authors of the draft. However, I would like to know also
> the opinions of the chairs on wether the early allocation procedure
> is the “normal procedure” or the “special case” for stable working
> group documents.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Óscar
>
>
>
> De: Fatai Zhang <[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>> Fecha: viernes, 5 de septiembre de
> 2014 07:59
>
> Hi Oscar,
>
>
>
> I don’t think we need to ask early allocation of code points, which
> is for the special case (ie., early allocation is not the normal
> procedure) and the right values will be allocated during RFC
> publication stage (ie., the clash will disappear) .
>
>
>
> The authors of this draft including me are taking care of this draft
> and we always welcome any review comments from the WG.
>
>
>
> Note that the WG chairs told in the previous meeting that they would
> like to move forward [draft-ietf-pce-gmpls-pcep-extensions
> <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/pce/draft-ietf-pce-gmpls-pcep-extensions/>]
> first, and then move forward this draft.
>
>
>
> Any further comments are apprecicated.
>
>
>
>
>
> Best Regards
>
>
>
> Fatai
>
>
>
> *From:*Pce [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *OSCAR
> GONZALEZ DE DIOS *Sent:* Thursday, September 04, 2014 6:00 PM
>
>
>
> Dear authors of draft-ietf-pce-inter-layer-ext,
>
>
>
> The draft draft-ietf-pce-inter-layer-ext, in its version 8 right now,
> introduces a set of new PCEP objects, which require object-class
> values. Current recommended values clash with already allocated
> values.
>
>
>
> As suggested in the last IETF meeting in Toronto, the use of the
> early allocation procedure is recommended to handle the code points
> (when the draft is stable). Would it be possible that authors of the
> draft ask for early allocation of code points for
> draft-ietf-pce-inter-layer-ext ?
>
>
>
> On the other hand, I see that the draft has been stable for a while
> and even has expired. Who is taking care of the updates of the draft?
> Is the draft going to last call in the near future? Are you expecting
> a review?
>
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
>
>
> Óscar
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------
>
>
> Este mensaje y sus adjuntos se dirigen exclusivamente a su
> destinatario, puede contener información privilegiada o confidencial
> y es para uso exclusivo de la persona o entidad de destino. Si no es
> usted. el destinatario indicado, queda notificado de que la lectura,
> utilización, divulgación y/o copia sin autorización puede estar
> prohibida en virtud de la legislación vigente. Si ha recibido este
> mensaje por error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por
> esta misma vía y proceda a su destrucción.
>
> The information contained in this transmission is privileged and
> confidential information intended only for the use of the individual
> or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.
> If you have received this transmission in error, do not read it.
> Please immediately reply to the sender that you have received this
> communication in error and then delete it.
>
> Esta mensagem e seus anexos se dirigem exclusivamente ao seu
> destinatário, pode conter informação privilegiada ou confidencial e é
> para uso exclusivo da pessoa ou entidade de destino. Se não é vossa
> senhoria o destinatário indicado, fica notificado de que a leitura,
> utilização, divulgação e/ou cópia sem autorização pode estar proibida
> em virtude da legislação vigente. Se recebeu esta mensagem por erro,
> rogamos-lhe que nos o comunique imediatamente por esta mesma via e
> proceda a sua destruição
>
>
> -------------------------
>
> Este mensaje y sus adjuntos se dirigen exclusivamente a su
> destinatario, puede contener información privilegiada o confidencial
> y es para uso exclusivo de la persona o entidad de destino. Si no es
> usted. el destinatario indicado, queda notificado de que la lectura,
> utilización, divulgación y/o copia sin autorización puede estar
> prohibida en virtud de la legislación vigente. Si ha recibido este
> mensaje por error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por
> esta misma vía y proceda a su destrucción.
>
> The information contained in this transmission is privileged and
> confidential information intended only for the use of the individual
> or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.
> If you have received this transmission in error, do not read it.
> Please immediately reply to the sender that you have received this
> communication in error and then delete it.
>
> Esta mensagem e seus anexos se dirigem exclusivamente ao seu
> destinatário, pode conter informação privilegiada ou confidencial e é
> para uso exclusivo da pessoa ou entidade de destino. Se não é vossa
> senhoria o destinatário indicado, fica notificado de que a leitura,
> utilização, divulgação e/ou cópia sem autorização pode estar proibida
> em virtude da legislação vigente. Se recebeu esta mensagem por erro,
> rogamos-lhe que nos o comunique imediatamente por esta mesma via e
> proceda a sua destruição
>
>
> _______________________________________________ Pce mailing list
> [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
