[Idr] Robert Wilton's No Objection on draft-ietf-idr-capabilities-registry-change-08: (with COMMENT)

Robert Wilton via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Mon, 04 May 2020 09:40 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: idr@ietf.org
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 567D33A0659; Mon, 4 May 2020 02:40:34 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Robert Wilton via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-idr-capabilities-registry-change@ietf.org, idr-chairs@ietf.org, idr@ietf.org, Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>, aretana.ietf@gmail.com, jgs@juniper.net, shares@ndzh.com
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.129.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <158858523391.15266.770083759718373527@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 04 May 2020 02:40:34 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/P_n9CloPwdClY_MmAy2ofZLsIt4>
Subject: [Idr] Robert Wilton's No Objection on draft-ietf-idr-capabilities-registry-change-08: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/idr/>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 May 2020 09:40:34 -0000

Robert Wilton has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-idr-capabilities-registry-change-08: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:


This document is straight forward and easy to read and understand.  I had one
minor comment.

   [RFC5492] designates the range of Capability Codes 128-255 as
   "Reserved for Private Use".  Subsequent experience has shown this to
   be not only useless, but actively confusing to implementors.

It might possibly be helpful to expand this paragraph slightly.

Because what was once "Reserved for Private Use" is now being reclassified to
something non private, I presume that there are no BGP implementations using
these capability codes that could be broken by this reclassification.  Hence,
on the assumption that these codes are not in fact being used for private use,
it might be helpful to state that in order to help justify why it is okay to
make this change.