Re: [mpls] Review of draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-registries-update-01

Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu> Wed, 08 April 2020 10:34 UTC

Return-Path: <loa@pi.nu>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 715753A11DF; Wed, 8 Apr 2020 03:34:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 u_NrBxnstV44; Wed, 8 Apr 2020 03:34:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C72BF3A11B5; Wed, 8 Apr 2020 03:34:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.7] (unknown [122.2.101.167]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0255F31D7AC; Wed, 8 Apr 2020 12:34:41 +0200 (CEST)
To: adrian@olddog.co.uk, draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-registries-update@ietf.org
Cc: mpls@ietf.org
References: <0f5701d60847$ed2a2230$c77e6690$@olddog.co.uk>
From: Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>
Message-ID: <af5d3285-0c7c-608d-b824-7ae57de5e3a7@pi.nu>
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2020 18:34:23 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <0f5701d60847$ed2a2230$c77e6690$@olddog.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/06kjOQdPUP290T5uuWVOujfBqtM>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Review of draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-registries-update-01
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mpls/>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Apr 2020 10:34:55 -0000

Adrian,

inline please

On 02/04/2020 01:06, Adrian Farrel wrote:
> However, how I don't see how these bullets belong in this document. What
> do the processing rules have to do with the IANA registries? The
> paragraph immediately after the bullets would seem to be enough.

The problem is that the code points have been named based on the
processing rules.

/Loa

-- 

My mail server it uner a DOS attack, we are working to fix it but it
may take some time.


Loa Andersson                        email: loa@pi.nu
Senior MPLS Expert
Bronze Dragon Consulting             phone: +46 739 81 21 64