Re: [CCAMP] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7260 (4106)

"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Fri, 05 December 2014 15:49 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B36011ACEDC; Fri, 5 Dec 2014 07:49:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eXPaeyArvVju; Fri, 5 Dec 2014 07:49:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from asmtp5.iomartmail.com (asmtp5.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.176]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A3801A1A0F; Fri, 5 Dec 2014 07:49:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from asmtp5.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp5.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id sB5FnBqu014628; Fri, 5 Dec 2014 15:49:11 GMT
Received: from 950129200 (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp5.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id sB5Fn8ov014615 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 5 Dec 2014 15:49:08 GMT
From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: <gregory.mirsky@ericsson.com>
References: <20140908192308.6BD2B180015@rfc-editor.org>
In-Reply-To: <20140908192308.6BD2B180015@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2014 15:49:02 -0000
Message-ID: <11ca01d010a2$fff2c130$ffd84390$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_11CB_01D010A2.FFF5CE70"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQG4SRPFXWGhuDh/2iDRqFsJvZBrd5ywq2Zg
Content-Language: en-gb
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.1.0.1576-7.5.0.1018-21152.000
X-TM-AS-Result: No--14.089-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--14.089-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: Rp71wniPtoMwJ6xbTjBa5j24QfyP59+REQhmLSwsumrWgeiceig+bYjs z3Ta+/YE8p796sClznJgkuCSmHpeTLfptZTbFVSKl1zsjZ1/6aygD0t7xcmluv002DXYmoa1QLr Z4mdNKtWtcw7GcMT4xOzMxVgUVmx/iq265D4ITu9UdfWpvPVkNQGZ/+APXW9ks1NEfuQ2w2wygv vk2n2Dkc9fXdWbM+5n/du/64FUJjqnykMun0J1wu9VsdrlGzy3Q6/DFZugyt0wODfUl7mJKf4ZA Usty2ENqv6+7o00zYeLFgnz+hpr+XW0oJLOugKBj1RGQOB2Vvn9GaYSzB/sh6Jd7mc2dRi3oEoz raubH2nx6gF+AN4QjuBe5QRmIfivPwbcb/CNUOlwvDydhBUuyCAXLFyLhL5W5GdZsk1yqBcqoeX FMnt4lSJunynLhcivKEdCtwyfJsLWV8MKb34RlRZU/yoIC8o9JVsoL7U3JcDimKcLRvsB1UauzW hZogiAzkH/0tV77RAZttB2H+RMvyWvhQBtQUwTb/5HBZ6dvRh3Bf9JIqsoeA8YwboCQc88n0/rR Q9krRF9xQFIjQfO0oYCheGFuxsgL3m5ejCdaFGdCtkMrsOtOpkShYcLpGH9H06W6rwtvNULlTHL QDwoLbuwuIYnhcFSgDLqnrRlXrbVE7HmVnVGHv7E6GNqs6cesjvNV98mpPMD8pATt91pfuFzZRw dMo0L5h/zU3hLHs6IBKymqZqNp8DyhYqKEQgIxWCH9IQozrMqyguCp7MkCzpjCNjHFvGDAqkQfV EP3kc=
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/XJ2GiRFvh2itEV3XBCQdF12SX14
Cc: ccamp@ietf.org, teas@ietf.org, akatlas@gmail.com, dbrungard@att.com
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7260 (4106)
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group <ccamp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ccamp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ccamp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2014 15:49:40 -0000

Hi Greg,
 
I'm returning to this after an indecent interval.
 
I checked with IANA and they are OK that we can make this sort of change with an
Errata Report and they are happy.
 
So now we have to agree what it should say.
 
There is an error in your suggested change, I think because in the first table
you show 65533 as IETF review, and in the second as reserved for
experimentation.
 
I am keen to make only the minimal changes to fix the obvious bugs. Therefore I
think there is no need to reserve 65535 and it can remain as an experimental
value.
 
That leaves us with...
 
    IANA has created the "OAM Sub-TLVs" sub-registry of the "RSVP-TE OAM
    Configuration Registry" as follows:
    Range       | Note                         | Registration Procedures
    ------------+------------------------------|------------------------
    0-31        | Generic Sub-TLVs             | IETF Review
   32-65533    | Technology-specific Sub-TLVs | IETF Review
    65534-65535 | Experimental Sub-TLVs        | Reserved for
                                               |   Experimental Use
    IANA has populated the registry as follows:
       Sub-TLV Type | Description                   | Reference
       -------------+-------------------------------+----------
           0        | Reserved                      | [RFC7260]
           1        | OAM Function Flags Sub-TLV    | [RFC7260]
           2-65533  | Unassigned                    |
       65534-65535  | Reserved for Experimental Use | [RFC7260]
 
Is everyone OK with that change?
 
Thanks,
Adrian