IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: IPv10 RFC.

Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu> Wed, 16 November 2016 15:50 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@isi.edu>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F1901294B7 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 07:50:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.396
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.396 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 b0sr2ayY5kN4 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 07:50:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from vapor.isi.edu (vapor.isi.edu [128.9.64.64]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4980B126BF7 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 07:50:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.158] (cpe-172-250-251-17.socal.res.rr.com [172.250.251.17]) (authenticated bits=0) by vapor.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id uAGFnZXh001890 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 16 Nov 2016 07:49:45 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail-5439CAA3-CF8B-42DF-8B0A-27ED583E4DF3"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Subject: Re: IPv10 RFC.
From: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
X-Mailer: iPad Mail (14B72)
In-Reply-To: <HE1PR04MB1449DD9698E9A80A379B73CBBDBE0@HE1PR04MB1449.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 07:49:35 -0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <395259C9-750B-4645-B6C6-F715783A51EB@isi.edu>
References: <HE1PR04MB1449DD9698E9A80A379B73CBBDBE0@HE1PR04MB1449.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
To: Khaled Omar <eng.khaled.omar@hotmail.com>
X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: touch@isi.edu
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/vdKnoxxOZZZJDwSOju3kGHHvvVg>
Cc: "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 15:50:13 -0000

See RFC 2780, Section 3.

IP version numbers are assigned only as the result of the IETF approving a new standard.

I.e, IANA will be declining your request so you should stop referring to this as v10. It might be 11 or might never get a number. Using a number before it is assigned is called squatting and is considered bad practice.

Joe

> On Nov 16, 2016, at 3:28 AM, Khaled Omar <eng.khaled.omar@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi all IETF members,
>  
> Please find the attached IPv10 RFC.
>  
> I think it should pick a number, have a status, and be published, something like that I do not have experience with as this is my first RFC.
>  
> What about a WG for IPv10?
>  
> I contacted IANA asking for a reservation for the version #10 and waiting for their reply.
>  
> Is there something missing?, if no, what is next?
>  
> Thanks all for your co-operation.
>  
> Best regards,
>  
> Khaled Omar
>  
>  
> <IPv10 RFC.txt>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email