RE: [PWE3] Last Call: 'IANA Allocations for pseudo Wire Edge to E dge Emulation (PWE3)' to BCP
"Gray, Eric" <Eric.Gray@marconi.com> Tue, 18 October 2005 21:20 UTC
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1ERysT-00050i-SV; Tue, 18 Oct 2005 17:20:09 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1ERysR-00050R-Kt; Tue, 18 Oct 2005 17:20:07 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA29050; Tue, 18 Oct 2005 17:19:59 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailgate.pit.comms.marconi.com ([169.144.68.6]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ERz43-0004qQ-91; Tue, 18 Oct 2005 17:32:07 -0400
Received: from mailman.pit.comms.marconi.com (mailman.pit.comms.marconi.com [169.144.2.12]) by mailgate.pit.comms.marconi.com (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j9ILJtrP002340; Tue, 18 Oct 2005 17:19:55 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from uspitsmsgrtr01.pit.comms.marconi.com (uspitsmsgrtr01.pit.comms.marconi.com [169.144.2.221]) by mailman.pit.comms.marconi.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA19739; Tue, 18 Oct 2005 17:19:54 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by uspitsmsgrtr01.pit.comms.marconi.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) id <40SXX5HZ>; Tue, 18 Oct 2005 18:19:54 -0300
Message-ID: <313680C9A886D511A06000204840E1CF0C885FB4@whq-msgusr-02.pit.comms.marconi.com>
From: "Gray, Eric" <Eric.Gray@marconi.com>
To: 'Luca Martini' <lmartini@cisco.com>, "Gray, Eric" <Eric.Gray@marconi.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 18:19:53 -0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: a1852b4f554b02e7e4548cc7928acc1f
Cc: 'Harald Tveit Alvestrand' <harald@alvestrand.no>, Stewart Bryant <stbryant@cisco.com>, pwe3@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org, iesg@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [PWE3] Last Call: 'IANA Allocations for pseudo Wire Edge to E dge Emulation (PWE3)' to BCP
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Luca, Thanks! -- Eric --> -----Original Message----- --> From: ietf-bounces@ietf.org --> [mailto:ietf-bounces@ietf.org]On Behalf Of --> Luca Martini --> Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2005 1:38 PM --> To: Gray, Eric --> Cc: 'Harald Tveit Alvestrand'; ietf@ietf.org; pwe3@ietf.org; --> iesg@ietf.org; Stewart Bryant --> Subject: Re: [PWE3] Last Call: 'IANA Allocations for pseudo --> Wire Edge to --> E dge Emulation (PWE3)' to BCP --> --> --> Eric, --> --> Last Call Has ended , and I did not see any objections to --> using the IETF --> consensus instead of "reserved" . ( which I mean to be --> according to rfc --> 2434 ) --> --> I also support having the working changed from reserved to "IETF --> consensus according to rfc 2434" as suggested by Stewart. --> I believe that this will give the IETF the same degree os --> control, over --> the allocations , but will significantly cut down on bureaucracy. --> --> Luca --> --> --> Gray, Eric wrote: --> > Harald, --> > --> > Yes, word-smithing is hard. In this case, there was --> > one position that the majority of the number spaces might --> > be used for vendor specific applications (where "vendor" - --> > in this case - includes organizations in general and vendor --> > cooperative fora specifically). --> > --> > The choice for "Standards Action" would eliminate at --> > least part of the number space from being used in this way --> > - even at the cost of going through the last call process. --> > It's hard to be both vendor proprietary and standard. --> > --> > Most of the negotiation process in this case has been --> > with an awareness of RFC 2434 as Thomas Narten and no less --> > than two current ADs have previously referred discussion to --> > this RFC at least a few times. --> > --> > -- --> > Eric --> > --> > --> -----Original Message----- --> > --> From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand [mailto:harald@alvestrand.no] --> > --> Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2005 6:38 PM --> > --> To: Gray, Eric; Stewart Bryant; iesg@ietf.org --> > --> Cc: pwe3@ietf.org; ietf@ietf.org --> > --> Subject: RE: [PWE3] Last Call: 'IANA Allocations for pseudo --> > --> Wire Edge to --> > --> E dge Emulation (PWE3)' to BCP --> > --> --> > --> --> > --> --> > --> --> > --> --On onsdag, oktober 05, 2005 19:00:42 -0300 "Gray, Eric" --> > --> <Eric.Gray@marconi.com> wrote: --> > --> --> > --> > Harald, --> > --> > --> > --> > The trouble is - know it or not - this "language choice" --> > --> > is the result of a lot of wrangling. Your comment is a late --> > --> > comer to the "party" as we have been round and round on this --> > --> > as well as other issues relating to this document. What you --> > --> > see now is the current negotiated position, and it would be --> > --> > very nice if we did not have yet another round of --> negotiations --> > --> > because someone else is not exactly happy with what --> we have... --> > --> --> > --> sure. When you say "....are allocated through the IETF --> > --> Consensus Process", --> > --> I'm just not sure if you are referring to this from 2434: --> > --> --> > --> IETF Consensus - New values are assigned --> through the IETF --> > --> consensus process. Specifically, new assignments --> > --> are made via --> > --> RFCs approved by the IESG. Typically, the --> IESG will seek --> > --> input on prospective assignments from --> appropriate persons --> > --> (e.g., a relevant Working Group if one exists). --> > --> --> > --> It's been a troublesome choice in the past (at the --> moment, the IESG --> > --> position is, I believe, that at least a Last Call is needed --> > --> for such an --> > --> assignment, but not necessarily an approved internet-draft, --> > --> although that --> > --> is preferred). --> > --> --> > --> I'm happy to have PWE3 suggest what it wants to suggest - --> > --> my worry is --> > --> chiefly that the IETF has a shared understanding of what --> > --> PWE3 is suggesting. --> > --> --> > --> Wordsmithing is hard. --> > --> --> > --> Harald --> > --> --> > --> --> > --> --> > --> --> > --> --> > --> > _______________________________________________ --> > Ietf mailing list --> > Ietf@ietf.org --> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf --> --> --> _______________________________________________ --> Ietf mailing list --> Ietf@ietf.org --> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf --> _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
- RE: [PWE3] Last Call: 'IANA Allocations for pseud… Gray, Eric
- RE: [PWE3] Last Call: 'IANA Allocations for pseud… Harald Tveit Alvestrand
- RE: [PWE3] Last Call: 'IANA Allocations for pseud… Gray, Eric
- Re: [PWE3] Last Call: 'IANA Allocations for pseud… Luca Martini
- RE: [PWE3] Last Call: 'IANA Allocations for pseud… Gray, Eric