Re: [mpls] Poll for Adoption draft-lcap-mpls-moving-iana-registries-02

Tom and Carlos,

Thanks for the hint, I just forwarded the call for adoption to the PWE3
list and asked for comments on the MPLS list.

Tom, with my PWE3 co-chair on, I really agree with Carlos that the end
benefits are much better than the current situation where we've organically
arrived. There are times where a cleanup really does help, and this is one
of them.

Cheers,
Andy

On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Carlos Pignataro (cpignata) <
cpignata@cisco.com> wrote:

> Tom,
>
> It is, indeed, a tradeoff whether to update IANA registries (or documents
> for that matter) after-the-fact. I agree that both sides of the equation
> need to be weighted, and thanks for the input. I will add that there is a
> timing condition to the trade-off, such that controlling mess earlier
> prevents compounded mess.
>
> Based on these points, my thoughts:
>
>    1. I contend that in this case, we end up with better underlying RFCs
>    as well -- if you actually check the RFCs being updated, none of them have
>    pointers (URIs) to the actual IANA registries. Only vague descriptions --
>    so the registries are really hard to find. With this update, the RFCs'
>    metadata are updated, and the new RFC will have precise pointers.
>    2. Is the WG planning on adding features that require numbers for
>    G-ACh? If the answer is at least "maybe" or "potentially", then we should
>    do this now to prevent exponential mess. Arguably we should have done this
>    earlier.
>
> Regarding PWE3, I agree as well -- Andy Malis weighted in, feel free to
> also forward the poll to PWE3.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -- Carlos.
>
> On Sep 6, 2013, at 7:53 AM, t.petch <ietfc@btconnect.com> wrote:
>
> Messy
>
> We end up with a better IANA registry but with worse underlying RFC,
> since this updates seven of them, making it harder to find the current
> status of the MPLS standards, and we already have an awful lot of MPLS
> RFC interacting with each other.
>
> Is there a half-way house which gives us most of the benefit with fewer
> updates?
>
> And this hits PWE3 so I think that they should be polled as well.
>
> On balance, I do not support this.
>
> Tom Petch
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ross Callon" <rcallon@juniper.net>
> To: <mpls@ietf.org>
> Cc: <mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org>; <loa@mail01.huawei.com>
> Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2013 5:01 PM
> Subject: [mpls] Poll for Adoption
> draft-lcap-mpls-moving-iana-registries-02
>
>
> This is to start a "two week" poll on adopting
> draft-lcap-mpls-moving-iana-registries-02
> as an MPLS working group document.
>
> Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working
> group mailing list (mpls@ietf.org<mailto:mpls@ietf.org <mpls@ietf.org>>).
>
> This poll will end September 20, 2013.
>
> Thanks, Ross
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>
>