IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Int-area] GUE: IANA Considerations question

Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com> Wed, 23 October 2019 14:50 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@strayalpha.com>
X-Original-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 889B8120872; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 07:50:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.218
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.218 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=strayalpha.com
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 C6NJ7HW8ZHnL; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 07:50:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from server217-3.web-hosting.com (server217-3.web-hosting.com [198.54.115.226]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1FC9B120822; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 07:50:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=strayalpha.com; s=default; h=To:References:Message-Id:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To: From:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=JlwqQB4SLbDfNvjQXhRz7EMSow66NJMVWd6Yt8nb2eU=; b=jLXvrE/IBhulUwCwgKmqH4e7X DuGG9irF2tiKtLXNq5gQwhvrXztMIJBhV8OORUqV6pz5oSGdGyYfF2dqJrPpk6uv+w7jOKTxo+X4z ezm98qJsyf1lBBmgWncPKaQrwv0o4/DJNhHc0FUeXzTdCuA0+yXPFvvv462LILKJenb1ywILM6kTj I2CMAxkLn4BHHTCu3uIh4Z+/cj5B7kFidZdsuxijvIxeSgWlDOoCiOjVnqulZFuGuzyuXwd4HBTJo oiPMblSrdp9z8hCVrvlqBMTgmTP/9Cxi6GylFa9UIWlPkWvEwgxzUtsYZRSFFFPLfcDaUYjsavjKH 2d/HVBRRw==;
Received: from cpe-172-250-225-198.socal.res.rr.com ([172.250.225.198]:58947 helo=[192.168.1.10]) by server217.web-hosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <touch@strayalpha.com>) id 1iNHy7-000c4Z-64; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 10:50:50 -0400
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_412BC235-0CDA-4466-A177-02699006B084"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>
In-Reply-To: <A8B171FC-77AB-49F7-9A8A-620B5671560D@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2019 07:50:32 -0700
Cc: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>, int-area <int-area@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-intarea-gue@ietf.org
Message-Id: <A4938F6F-39F4-4296-8A9C-30E17E12B173@strayalpha.com>
References: <CA+RyBmW+XgBaYvOnKzfYiN63=JSf9Ckpe4Ga9oZtmdK+weppTQ@mail.gmail.com> <A8B171FC-77AB-49F7-9A8A-620B5671560D@gmail.com>
To: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server217.web-hosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - strayalpha.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: server217.web-hosting.com: authenticated_id: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Authenticated-Sender: server217.web-hosting.com: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-From-Rewrite: unmodified, already matched
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/4-b1NrGi9HEfSHDrF7dXmaaK8Cs>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] GUE: IANA Considerations question
X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List <int-area.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/int-area/>
List-Post: <mailto:int-area@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2019 14:50:53 -0000

It would also be useful to understand why you think more than one code point is needed for experiments (vs the RFC6994-style approach).

Joe

> On Oct 23, 2019, at 7:36 AM, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Greg,
> 
>> On Oct 23, 2019, at 6:44 AM, Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com <mailto:gregimirsky@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> Dear Authors, et al.,
>> I have a rather benign question the new registry requested in Section 8.3. The draft states that the whole 1-127 range is "RFC required" per RFC 5226. Firstly, a nit - RFC 5226 has been obsoleted by RFC 8126. My question is Would you agree to split the 128-255 range and set First Come First Served sub-range. For example:
> 
> Please explain why you are proposing this change.
> 
> Thanks,
> Bob
> 
> 
>>      +----------------+------------------+---------------+
>>      |  Control type  | Description      | Reference     |
>>      +----------------+------------------+---------------+
>>      | 0              | Control payload  | This document |
>>      |                | needs more       |               |
>>      |                | context for      |               |
>>      |                | interpretation   |               |
>>      |                |                  |               |
>>      | 1..127         | Unassigned       |               |
>>      |                |                  |               |
>>      | 128..250       | First Come       | RFC 8126      |
>>      |                | First Served     |               |
>>      | 251..254       | Experimental     | This document |
>>      |                |                  |               |
>>      | 255            | Reserved         | This document |
>>      |                |                  |               |
>>      +----------------+------------------+---------------+
>> 
>> Also, you may consider updating 0 as Reserved and assigning 1 as Control payload ...
>> Much appreciate your consideration.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Greg
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Int-area mailing list
>> Int-area@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Int-area mailing list
> Int-area@ietf.org <mailto:Int-area@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email