Re: [Isis-wg] Gen-art LC review draft-ietf-isis-tlv-codepoints-00

Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com> Sun, 20 July 2014 15:14 UTC

Return-Path: <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: isis-wg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: isis-wg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5A641B282A; Sun, 20 Jul 2014 08:14:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 Q_fxOVisaOAP; Sun, 20 Jul 2014 08:14:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (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 0A4E11B281E; Sun, 20 Jul 2014 08:14:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dhcp-b408.meeting.ietf.org (dhcp-b408.meeting.ietf.org [31.133.180.8]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.14.9/8.14.7) with ESMTP id s6KFDu8m033016 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=OK); Sun, 20 Jul 2014 10:13:57 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from rjsparks@nostrum.com)
Message-ID: <53CBDCB4.8020807@nostrum.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2014 11:13:56 -0400
From: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <ginsberg@cisco.com>, "draft-ietf-isis-tlv-codepoints@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-isis-tlv-codepoints@tools.ietf.org>, "isis-wg@ietf.org" <isis-wg@ietf.org>, General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>
References: <53CBD1B9.7080800@nostrum.com> <F3ADE4747C9E124B89F0ED2180CC814F23E7AAD6@xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <F3ADE4747C9E124B89F0ED2180CC814F23E7AAD6@xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/isis-wg/Pn2wnL7pJv0e2rGHDbOnh8W9cvo
Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] Gen-art LC review draft-ietf-isis-tlv-codepoints-00
X-BeenThere: isis-wg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IS-IS working group <isis-wg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/isis-wg>, <mailto:isis-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/isis-wg/>
List-Post: <mailto:isis-wg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:isis-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg>, <mailto:isis-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2014 15:14:05 -0000

On 7/20/14, 11:04 AM, Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) wrote:
> Robert -
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Isis-wg [mailto:isis-wg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Robert Sparks
>> Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2014 7:27 AM
>> To: draft-ietf-isis-tlv-codepoints@tools.ietf.org; isis-wg@ietf.org; General
>> Area Review Team
>> Subject: [Isis-wg] Gen-art LC review draft-ietf-isis-tlv-codepoints-00
>>
>> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
>> Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
>>
>> <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
>>
>> Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
>> you may receive.
>>
>> Document: draft-ietf-isis-tlv-codepoints-00
>> Reviewer: Robert Sparks
>> Review Date: 20-Jul-2014
>> IETF LC End Date: 25-Jul-2014
>> IESG Telechat date: 7-Aug-2014
>>
>> Summary: Basically ready for publication, but with process nits for the
>> group and the IESG to consider
>>
>> Thanks for assembling such a clearly written document.
>>
>> The shepherd writeup should have discussed _why_ this document is
>> intended for Proposed Standard.
>> There is no protocol definition here, and nothing to progress on the
>> standards ladder. This is, instead,
>> primarily defining process. Why isn't this being progressed as a BCP?
> The document does two things:
>
> 1)It updates some registries for sub-TLVs defined at http://www.iana.org/assignments/isis-tlv-codepoints/isis-tlv-codepoints.xhtml
>
> As these changes are modifying the format (not the content) of registries used by a number of standards track RFCs it needs to be a standards track document.
I don't believe that follows. A BCP could update these documents as well.
>
> 2)It defines procedures for early allocation of codepoints from the above registry.
>
> While an argument could be made that this portion should be BCP, the fact that it is combined with #1 requires that the document be Standards track.
>
>> Should this Update any of the RFCs that previously defined these registries?
> Yes - it updates the following RFCs: 5130, 5311
The  document header (and abstract) should be updated to indicate that.
>
>     Les
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Isis-wg mailing list
>> Isis-wg@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg