Hi Jingrong,

The behaviours numbers are not hold privately: they are hold by the working 
group until the RFC is published and therefore the new IANA registry is 
created. After that, the registry is maintained by IANA with the registration 
procedure described in the draft.

If the paragraph in the draft is not clear, please feel free to propose a new 
one.

Note that Loa and Shuping particularly asked to clarify this. In Prague I met 
with them and we updated the following:

  *   SRv6 Endpoint Behavior sub-registry; second range: Changed registration 
procedure from “IETF Review” to “Specification required”
  *   Added paragraph clarifying who is maintaining the initial entries until 
the registry is created by IANA

Regards,
Pablo.

From: spring <[email protected]> on behalf of Xiejingrong 
<[email protected]>
Date: Wednesday, 10 July 2019 at 05:55
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: [spring] Comments on <draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming-01>

But one point I am even more confused:
   The SRv6 Endpoint Behavior numbers are maintained by the working
   group until the RFC is published.  Note to the RFC Editor: Remove
   this paragraph before publication.

Why does this document say to create a new registry, but hold the Behavior 
numbers privately ?
We need the IANA registry be created and allocation from the registry.
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring

Reply via email to