Hi, Given there are more and more on-going implementations and interoperate testing, I think it's better to allocate the necessary code points asap. Hence, I support the Early Allocation request.
Best regards, Mach From: spring [mailto:spring-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of bruno.decra...@orange.com Sent: Friday, December 20, 2019 12:54 AM To: SPRING WG <spring@ietf.org> Subject: [spring] draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming - 2 week Early Allocation Call Hi SPRING WG, This begins a 2 week Early Allocation call for a "Ethernet" value from the "Protocol Numbers" registry. https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming-07#section-9.1 https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming-07#section-5.3 https://www.iana.org/assignments/protocol-numbers/protocol-numbers.xhtml In parallel of the Working Group Last Call which is currently running, the authors are requesting for early code point allocation from IANA as implementations are under way. The criteria for early allocation are: a. The code points must be from a space designated as "RFC Required", "IETF Review", or "Standards Action". Additionally, requests for early assignment of code points from a "Specification Required" registry are allowed if the specification will be published as an RFC. b. The format, semantics, processing, and other rules related to handling the protocol entities defined by the code points (henceforth called "specifications") must be adequately described in an Internet-Draft. c. The specifications of these code points must be stable; i.e., if there is a change, implementations based on the earlier and later specifications must be seamlessly interoperable. d. The Working Group chairs and Area Directors (ADs) judge that there is sufficient interest in the community for early (pre-RFC) implementation and deployment, or that failure to make an early allocation might lead to contention for the code point in the field. https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7120#section-2 I believe the above conditions are met. (minus the AD judgement which is further down in the process) As a reminder, this topic has mainly been discussed following IETF 105 (Montréal) both during the meeting and on the mailing list. During IETF 106 it has been discussed in the IntArea WG. https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/106/proceedings#intarea Note that this code point is not to be specific to SRv6. Depending on AD guidance, this specific code point even be moved from draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming into a specific 1 page draft. If you support early adoption, please include "support" along with any comments about the draft's technical solution. If you do not support early allocation, please include "no support" in your email and indicate why. Thank you, --Bruno _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you.
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
