Re: [Lsr] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-segment-routing-extensions-20: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[Benjamin Kaduk <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, Jan 08, 2019 at 05:58:55PM +0100, Peter Psenak wrote:
> Hi Benjamin,
> 
> On 08/01/2019 17:16 , Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> 
> >
> > Well, there's a few options, and I don't want to try to dictate my
> > preferences onto your document.  What seems simplest to me would be to just
> > bite the bullet and establish an IANA registry for these AF values, but if
> > you wanted to do something else like saying that they are "beyond the scope
> > of this specification but may occur in future standards-track work" that
> > would also be fine.  I'm just trying to avoid some reader seeing "beyond
> > the scope of this specification" and thinking they can do whatever they
> > want and pick their own codepoint value to squat on.
> 
> would this be fine with you:
> 
> 
> "Prefix encoding for other address families is beyond the scope
> of this specification. Other address families may be defined in the 
> future standard-track IETF specifications."

Yes, with or without adding "Prefix encoding for" to the start of the
second sentence; please go ahead and I will clear.

Thank you again for your patience working through this, and my apologies
for the delays.

-Benjamin