Re: Last Call on draft-ietf-pim-registry-03.txt

Almost all registries I'm familiar with explicitly list unassigned
ranges. In some cases, different unassigned subranges have different
allocation policies. For example, there may be a small unassigned
range of lower values requiring Standards Action with the bulk of the
unassigned values allocatable on a less stringent basis.

Thanks,
Donald
=============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
 155 Beaver Street
 Milford, MA 01757 USA
 d3e3e3@gmail.com

On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 9:35 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
> On 12.01.2011 15:22, Adrian Farrel wrote:
>>
>> Entirely at random I clicked on:
>>
>> http://www.iana.org/assignments/aaa-parameters/aaa-parameters.xhtml
>> http://www.iana.org/assignments/calipso/calipso.xhtml
>> http://www.iana.org/assignments/lmp-parameters
>>
>> Looks like IANA tries to fill up all the blanks with markers of
>> "unassigned".
>>
>> Is that harmful?
>
> Minimally, it's redundant. Also, it only makes sense on certain types of
> registries.
>
> I just checked the XML version of the first registry, and, indeed, it
> contains entries for unassigned values. /me shakes head in disbelief.
>
> What *should* be done is computing the unassigned ranges for *presentation*;
> that is, they should not be part of the actual registry. The way it's done
> currently defeats one of the reasons of having a machine-readable registry
> (consumers will have to hard-wire knowledge of the specific "unassigned"
> entry to make sense of the registry).
>
> Best regards, Julian
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
>