-----Original Message-----
From: dhcwg <[email protected]> On Behalf Of tom petch
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2019 9:28 AM
To: Suresh Krishnan <[email protected]>; int-area <[email protected]>; 6man 
<[email protected]>; dhcwg <[email protected]>; V6 Ops List <[email protected]>; 
[email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] [Int-area] AD sponsoring draft-thaler-iftype-reg-02



Suresh



The concern I have is that it muddies the waters further on the standing of 
tunnels so while I think that its proposals for ifType per se are fine, I would 
like it to make explicit that tunnels are out-of-scope at this time.



Tunnels are certainly not out-of-scope.  There's two existing registries 
(interface types and tunnel types), and this draft documents existing 
registration process, and some process clarifications to address points of 
process confusion and ease process friction today.





I have been trying to reconcile the workings of softwire, in creating a tunnel 
YANG module, with the existing IANA structure and failing.  I believe that is 
because the current status of tunnels is unclear.  Thus the softwire I-D refers 
to a registry that does not exist



Yes it does.   The software I-D does not create any new registry.   It only 
creates another format for retrieving the contents of an existing registry..  
Many registries are retrievable in multiple formats (XML, excel, txt, etc.).   
This registry is no different.



What I can do is add a paragraph explaining the use of multiple formats for the 
interface type and tunnel type registries, to make it clear that each format is 
not a separate registry, just like getting the TCP port registry in XML vs 
excel is not two different registries.



Dave



(as such) although the URL that the softwire I-D does. I think the timing 
unfortunate in that IMHO the softwires I-D will get pressed ahead before this 
work can complete, so quite what this I-D then says about tunnels will be 
coloured by what then exists for tunnels.



So this I-D should make clear what a tunnel is, when it is not an interface, 
but otherwise declaring tunnels out-of-scope, for a future I-D to do a 
comparable job for tunnels, setting up a tunnel registry from which MIB 
modules, YANG modules and anything else can be derived (as long as the relevant 
data is supplied - SMI needs integers, YANG does not, which I-Ds do not always 
recognise although the Designated Experts can take care of that).



Finally, when I first encountered this I-D I asked on NETCONF and NETMOD WG 
lists if anyone knew of it, where it was being worked on and got no reply - 
which surprised me.  I note that you have not copied them although they were 
involved in making the interface type registry what it currently is when 
creating the YANG module for interface types.  I wonder if other WG have an 
interest, CCAMP or TEAS perhaps.  I agree that int-area is the WG best equipped 
to work on it and that it needs working on.



Tom Petch



----- Original Message -----

From: "Suresh Krishnan" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>

To: "int-area" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; "6man" 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; "dhcwg"

<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; "V6 Ops List" 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>

Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2019 7:22 PM



Hi all,

  I would like to AD sponsor the following draft that provides guidelines for 
definition of new interface types in the IANA IfType registries



https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftools.ietf.org%2Fhtml%2Fdraft-thaler-iftype-reg-02&amp;data=02%7C01%7Cdthaler%40microsoft.com%7Cbd9080f665064f564d3608d6f0e55a88%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636961265202763707&amp;sdata=HM5asXOFnSuzPaCR4k4kopqsIHLLdnqZ7PDuu8hPJM4%3D&amp;reserved=0



If you have any concerns either with the contents of the draft, or about me AD 
sponsoring it please let me know before 2019/06/26.



Thanks

Suresh



NOTE: I have CCed: all the working groups that I thought could be potentially 
interested in this work. If you think I have missed out some WG(s) please let 
me know.







------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------





> _______________________________________________

> Int-area mailing list

> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.

> ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fint-area&amp;data=02%7C01%7Cdthaler%40

> microsoft.com%7Cbd9080f665064f564d3608d6f0e55a88%7C72f988bf86f141af91a

> b2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636961265202763707&amp;sdata=znz7EZ1q%2FwIQUJC

> gYZTWfY2H4C7tN6qFhJubCVWxWzc%3D&amp;reserved=0

>



_______________________________________________

dhcwg mailing list

[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fdhcwg&amp;data=02%7C01%7Cdthaler%40microsoft..com%7Cbd9080f665064f564d3608d6f0e55a88%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636961265202763707&amp;sdata=OJvbRDz%2FCIlVF3hWR30KCs0cRgi9KmtnYLHKbHSeJzc%3D&amp;reserved=0
_______________________________________________
Softwires mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires

Reply via email to