Re: [Gen-art] Re: Gen-art review of draft-bberry-pppoe-credit-04.txt

[James Carlson <[e-mail]>]

Brian E Carpenter writes:
> > This document is extending PPPoE, which by no means is a standard of any 
> > kind. I'm not sure what status other than Informational I could ask for 
> > here.
> 
> You can't, but that leads to another question - why isn't PPoE a standards
> track protocol? I blinked back when that happened, apparently.

Partly because L2TP is on Standards Track (and thus PPPoE isn't and
wasn't needed), and partly because PPPoE wasn't written in the IETF at
all.

> > We intend to ask for an IANA space for the PPPoE tag registry. For this, 
> > and other PPPoE extensions.
> > 
> > draft-arberg-pppoe-iana-00.txt
> 
> That covers the tags but not the codes. RFC 2516 defines 8-bit codes
> like 0x09 and draft-bberry adds several more like 0x0A. So I think that
> field needs a registry too.

That's a pretty good point.  The Code values should have been
considered.

-- 
James Carlson, KISS Network                    <[e-mail]>
Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive         71.232W   Vox [phone]
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757   42.496N   Fax [phone]

_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art