Re: [ANCP] draft-ietf-ancp-mc-extensions-06

"Bocci, Matthew (Matthew)" <matthew.bocci@alcatel-lucent.com> Thu, 26 April 2012 08:39 UTC

Return-Path: <matthew.bocci@alcatel-lucent.com>
X-Original-To: ancp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ancp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F47C21F87BC for <ancp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 01:39:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -109.602
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-109.602 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.647, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4hJt-TVl0Ue7 for <ancp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 01:39:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smail2.alcatel.fr (smail2.alcatel.fr [64.208.49.57]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A104321F87C0 for <ancp@ietf.org>; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 01:39:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from FRMRSSXCHHUB04.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com (FRMRSSXCHHUB04.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com [135.120.45.64]) by smail2.alcatel.fr (8.14.3/8.14.3/ICT) with ESMTP id q3Q8XnHU001754 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT); Thu, 26 Apr 2012 10:39:17 +0200
Received: from FRMRSSXCHMBSA3.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.36]) by FRMRSSXCHHUB04.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.64]) with mapi; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 10:38:24 +0200
From: "Bocci, Matthew (Matthew)" <matthew.bocci@alcatel-lucent.com>
To: Tom Taylor <tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com>, "ancp@ietf.org" <ancp@ietf.org>, "ancp-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <ancp-chairs@tools.ietf.org>
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 10:38:22 +0200
Thread-Topic: draft-ietf-ancp-mc-extensions-06
Thread-Index: Ac0jh/DLJxmdikaCT1So/g51T2VK3A==
Message-ID: <CBBEC6E1.29CC8%matthew.bocci@alcatel-lucent.com>
In-Reply-To: <4F97F293.20009@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.0.120402
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.69 on 155.132.188.80
Subject: Re: [ANCP] draft-ietf-ancp-mc-extensions-06
X-BeenThere: ancp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Access Node Control Protocol working group mailing list <ancp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ancp>, <mailto:ancp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ancp>
List-Post: <mailto:ancp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ancp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ancp>, <mailto:ancp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 08:39:23 -0000

Tom,

It does seem to make sense to create a separate draft defining the error
code and its associated handling if we think that it would be of use
elsewhere and off it might be added to.

I propose the following way forward:

- Create a cleaned up version of the MC extensions draft
- create a separate error codes draft
- Run a short 1 week WG LC on the changes to the MC extensions draft.
- WG LC the error codes draft once MC extensions has gone to the IESG.

Regards

Matthew

On 25/04/2012 13:48, "Tom Taylor" <tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com> wrote:

>I have finished my review of draft-ietf-ancp-mc-extensions-06.
>Fortunately, I have not identified any further substantive issues other
>than the two I reported to the list the other day, but I do propose
>quite a few editorial changes. I could enumerate them if so desired.
>
>I need direction going forward. Shall I update the document with all my
>proposed changes and do a separate draft for the new 0x54 error code? I
>could delete explicit reference to that code in the multicast extensions
>draft, so we wouldn't have a dependency issue holding up publication.
>Then the new error code draft could be held open if implementers think
>they might come up with other base-level error codes.
>
>Tom Taylor