Re: [CCAMP] Request for early IANA Allocation for draft-ietf-ccamp-mpls-tp-rsvpte-ext-associated-lsp-09

"Adrian Farrel" <> Mon, 25 August 2014 18:32 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A52F1A0222 for <>; Mon, 25 Aug 2014 11:32:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -100
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id J5qE6UhiYldO for <>; Mon, 25 Aug 2014 11:32:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 57A931A0266 for <>; Mon, 25 Aug 2014 11:32:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (localhost.localdomain []) by (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s7PIVnV4007199; Mon, 25 Aug 2014 19:31:49 +0100
Received: from 950129200 ([]) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s7PIVh08007148 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 25 Aug 2014 19:31:45 +0100
From: Adrian Farrel <>
To: "'Rakesh Gandhi (rgandhi)'" <>, 'Lou Berger' <>, 'DEBORAH BRUNGARD' <>
References: <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 19:31:43 +0100
Message-ID: <049f01cfc092$d5513160$7ff39420$>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_04A0_01CFC09B.371B8CD0"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQH9B1yj91sAOsNuMMG6oulDQfYAkZuHFbkQ
Content-Language: en-gb
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-
X-TM-AS-Result: No--22.425-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--22.425-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: IeZYkn8zfFrW/bDrA6VrLZSHVES5ghPhv8jdqvFOu+KCsBeCv8CM/Xqm 1Q8ict9JJQ/WjsGoQcMUrqZm9kbKgKNvJJBiq11ac+QhWKJM04NuF+NwRO6jtN9zZd3pUn7KK93 7aFdF5XOTGFJBxjiv+fYWqi41b6DIwm4dL1EmZrmVUcz8XpiS9GXSofv/sdGOWcVk1+PpebbhQp MB+ASNb1WfyCpZ8bXOPOcDfuAjKqwwDxuznVf3+camcgjprEPzecvjbu/xDjpnERIK2lr8x+cY0 ejIrh8jOzYA9GKT4OPRD6klrXBS3F7N5twsEmhy71Wx2uUbPLdtv2q+Uxc7gmecrqZc3vabF24P 4yabpDYkePsv2B62QSp3/W0Z0/mk+zoAW8R15l8SuhBXNJb1dJv8tNLRPUrWInzOyTDR1uvZS1r p9Yrd0DTq9Fsx2y5X77J1NmQOmLErIbYOlrrv2pN65fjGjYMQ/bFfU5WtaotXG3yI9k2vbIAuOq ciU0p01eMp+in9a9PfCoL1Cy7eF/36sqVF/VZoS3OTftLNfg2U9XpVqqLhsPHFoBcOsKeziPsne PM42N0lrqsYlHhF+jC6IPNP8UWJUeL68LoXEvwFTi5T7nLXai3S35ohUu37krNbLf4aYG5czilU efYvAz+ZqQbT6/3u3rf2hEEVSR5DSkUa9i2162uj3ZVU+M9wlIvcAfYJnErimKcLRvsB1UauzWh ZogiAzkH/0tV77RAAv2+Gk5LgxYsxYRAg7qHw+KUzuemidPw70WisneTu7Y4V6C77fnjLmpFVmG A1607MDEuDg15grJ7jobRLBotGT+Zs2lM+sECeAiCmPx4NwGmRqNBHmBvevqq8s2MNhPDPPeN6H N6d7Ph03vGA0w/JIAcCikR3vq93LhgGW0EWj+LUDQ3Yve90Wkn4OSgpFN69OTxulMUgVeMpIt+r I10F
Cc: 'CCAMP' <>
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] Request for early IANA Allocation for draft-ietf-ccamp-mpls-tp-rsvpte-ext-associated-lsp-09
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 18:32:11 -0000

Not sure whether this fell through a crack as well.
I have to say that I *really* hate it when the early request is "Please give us
these numbers because we are already shipping". Can we all please to try to get
to this a little sooner so that the request can be "Please give us some numbers
because we are moving from testing to shipping very soon."
>From a process point of view, the text below looks adequate to me. The chairs
need to:
- check that this is what is in the I-D and that they think it is clear
- decide that the draft is sufficiently stable and likely to be 
  developed based on these code points.
- issue the request to IANA
From: CCAMP [] On Behalf Of Rakesh Gandhi (rgandhi)
Sent: 12 August 2014 15:10
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] Request for early IANA Allocation for
Hi Lou, Deborah,
Can you please advise next steps for this request ?
Thank you for your guidance.
From: Rakesh Gandhi <>
Date: Thursday, 24 July, 2014 6:54 PM
To: Lou Berger <>, DEBORAH BRUNGARD <>
Cc: CCAMP <>
Subject: Request for early IANA Allocation for
Hi CCAMP WG Chairs,
Following the procedure for Early IANA Allocation of Standards Track Code Points
defined in Section 3.1 of RFC 7120, on behalf of the authors of the WG draft
"RSVP-TE Extensions for Associated Bidirectional LSPs",
draft-ietf-ccamp-mpls-tp-rsvpte-ext-associated-lsp-09, we are requesting to
CCAMP WG chairs the early allocation of the following values: 
6.1. Association Types
   New Association Types for ASSOCIATION and Extended ASSOCIATION Objects are
defined in this document as follows:
   Value      Type
   -----      -----
   4 (TBD)    Double Sided Associated Bidirectional LSP (D)
   5 (TBD)    Single Sided Associated Bidirectional LSP (A)
   IANA maintains the "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)
Signaling Parameters" registry (see  "Association Type"
subregistry is included in this registry, which will be extended and updated by
this document.
6.2.  REVERSE_LSP Object
   A new class type for RSVP REVERSE_LSP Object has been requested in the
11bbbbbb range (TBD) with the following definition:
   Class Types or C-types (TBD), Value (TBD): REVERSE_LSP Object
   IANA maintains the "RSVP Parameters" registry (see Class
Names, Class Numbers, and Class Types subregistry is included in this registry,
which will be extended and updated by this document.
The main reason for this request is that this draft has been implemented in a
shipping product (using values from the draft and reserved range) but this can
now lead to interoperability issues and we like to make sure we are using
standard values before software is largely deployed in networks and avoid
interoperability issues.
Thank you,
Rakesh and co-authors