Re: [Isis-wg] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-isis-reverse-metric-07

["t.petch" <[e-mail]>]

A couple of IANA thoughts on this I-D;

"This document requests that IANA allocate from the IS-IS TLV
   Codepoints Registry a new TLV, "

- Is there a particular range that this value should come from?

- A note in s.2 asking that TBD be replaced by the value that IANA
allocates might be useful for the RFC Editor.

- Are the flag bits of this new TLV going to form a new registry?

- And a non-IANA thought - what does a receiver do if it receives more
than one such TLV?

"This document also request that IANA allocate from the link-attribute
   bit value for sub-TLV 19 of TLV 22."
 I struggled to parse this initially.

Perhaps
"This document also requests that IANA allocate a bit from the
'link-attribute bit values for sub-TLV 19 of TLV 22' registry.

(That registry title is a bit of a mouthful compounded by the lack of
Capitals in the title:-(

The coupling between the request to IANA to allocate the bit and the
actual definition in the body of the I-D is ... well, non-existent.  You
should have a something about the octet with a TBD2 (not a second TBD)
in section 3.6, a TBD2 in the IANA actions and a request that this be
replaced by RFC Editor by the value that IANA allocates.

Yes, a reader can deduce all this but the lack of precision is how
mistakes are made IMO.  RFC5209 has the sort of detail that I would
expect.

Tom Petch

----- Original Message -----
From: "Naiming Shen (naiming)" <[e-mail]>