IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com> Wed, 23 October 2019 14:46 UTC

Return-Path: <tom@herbertland.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 42FAE120932 for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 07:46:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=herbertland-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 pP_lPklc9eEG for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 07:46:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ed1-x541.google.com (mail-ed1-x541.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::541]) (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 DD668120822 for <int-area@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 07:46:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ed1-x541.google.com with SMTP id b72so7015193edf.1 for <int-area@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 07:46:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=herbertland-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Cz4L19V29nHODa3Sag/erT3s/Pc7afYt2OLj60RpsbM=; b=k/EGXG0LoAhg2vde4eoznnMprQWBb9aMTO0MoS+Xt40DSk1CMkX9V/St1ekqxuXiFY 2mxr5eDueYmQCS5LRterQvrAsDD8PIPIFoP9UW9I7K5GDnHJeVbGwyJFbIjdIzc2hCN2 OQ+pZgxos8S0sQPDuPYtKR/6dOFwdxic5OK3Jx5OlXbCm9B73n2VQ1jaoWFQRzy2SQtb 7wawdZ9tqc+P282d2FMo7NxUD6R3um62aPrkBVzVAB5jy6o19uTHKCFTN+t/h55lsjoR b5Wj27GhfKJx/6WOgN402jHwb1z0EnLk4RovPrSBtw7zoKrm/1W/GAkvEMRmLLASDwl6 Q6gQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Cz4L19V29nHODa3Sag/erT3s/Pc7afYt2OLj60RpsbM=; b=C8aqxTfhqvxW1g6xp2WX7YEBhn+8nN5+Frep7UZdhkPjSNWaH1b8Wex9hqhQwP37WJ mteCSmQwZJSOXIOhVbqEFpcOoHYkbdxp3troG13Hrfncl/WCkZpaNSl6jV7JRt07e4aR bXlOJgVKdbvxHrXfAzHTO1qfJcD9gGCgL1/1QJQ2Ulb3cohYFtn05D4GhbZ24cn7m+mO /f8NcGYSpAWRHey+rXu/GlDxzSjocxPTdfXHQ9ghQ+LFOEjC218LmXQRoh2XSr5yiha0 2Wm4mHkCfgdSflftq466NDAwISNcld1PUiW8S3w7wUe9TZ1JO0g4bzJ86BraTW3cZFnN ZHtg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUvi/yv829GN+AHSnjFiZaICgFMmMBHeMwp5IyXP9DpwcdsRr4X zvaKh6pribCTn9FLZD+Z9QfH4MB1SyY4vktwob5OHA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyekWhIy+CoIp89yqRwcQNTTBCjYfElcZfJFhvt/eBh5kIegxlralaJKjkuckJFPDzLky9Y2Za4Nq+JtgdhcxY=
X-Received: by 2002:aa7:cd01:: with SMTP id b1mr9096762edw.122.1571841995337; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 07:46:35 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CA+RyBmW+XgBaYvOnKzfYiN63=JSf9Ckpe4Ga9oZtmdK+weppTQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+RyBmW+XgBaYvOnKzfYiN63=JSf9Ckpe4Ga9oZtmdK+weppTQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2019 07:46:24 -0700
Message-ID: <CALx6S34rsYD-mt5yF1pQsxQ1E4fM-SVBp81rW_d14UpD5vfeJA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
Cc: draft-ietf-intarea-gue@ietf.org, int-area <int-area@ietf.org>, Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@gmail.com>, Joel Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/evTIozprLtenGqxGyTfeSZCRj-A>
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 14:46:42 -0000

On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 6:44 AM Greg Mirsky <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:
>
>       +----------------+------------------+---------------+
>       |  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.

Greg,

My immediate question is would this encourage people to develop quasi
proprietary control types? (which they would probably do anyway in
using experimental values but wouldn't acknowledged by IANA).

Tom
>
> Regards,
> Greg
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email