Re: [mpls] draft-andersson-mpls-lsp-ping-registries-update-01 - Updating the LSP Ping IANA registries

[Carlos Pignataro <[e-mail]>]

Hi, Adrian, Loa,

In this new proposed text:
>    RFC 8126 [RFC8126] updated the LSP Ping IANA registries to match
>    RFC 8029, but there were still some ambiguities, that were
>    reflected in the registries.


Should RFC 8126 be instead RFC 8611?

If so, then:
1. RFC 8126 could stay as it was.
2. RFC 8611 should be Normative (given the new text from Adrian, on RFC 8611 and not 8126).

Thanks!

—
Carlos Pignataro, http://carlos.pignataro.net <http://carlos.pignataro.net/>

“Sometimes I use big words that I do not fully understand, to make myself sound more photosynthesis."

> On Aug 16, 2019, at 7:14 AM, Adrian Farrel <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Yeah,
> 
> I think that Carlos was right in the context of the text he reviewed, but with my change the reference should stay normative.
> 
> Best,
> Adrian
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Loa Andersson <[e-mail]> 
> Sent: 16 August 2019 12:11
> To: Carlos Pignataro <[e-mail]>
> Cc: [e-mail]; mpls <[e-mail]>; Adrian Farrel <[e-mail]>
> Subject: Re: draft-andersson-mpls-lsp-ping-registries-update-01 - Updating the LSP Ping IANA registries
> 
> Folks, (adding Adrian as Shepherd),
> 
> It has take me a long tiime to start updating the draft according to the
> much appreciated comments from Carlos and Adrian.
> 
> I have a question on one of the comments from Carlos:
> 
> On 2019-08-06 22:14, Carlos Pignataro wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>    [RFC8611]  Akiya, N., Swallow, G., Litkowski, S., Decraene, B.,
>>               Drake, J., and M. Chen, "Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping
>>               and Traceroute Multipath Support for Link Aggregation
>>               Group (LAG) Interfaces", RFC 8611, DOI 10.17487/RFC8611,
>>               June 2019, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8611>.
>> 
>> 
>> CMP: This should be Informative.
> 
> Adrain comment on updating RFC 8611 (his suggested text for Section 1):
> 
> NEW
>    When RFC 8029 [RFC8029] where published it contained among other
>    things updates to the "Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label
>    Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters" IANA name space
>    [IANA-LSP-PING].
> 
>    RFC 8126 [RFC8126] updated the LSP Ping IANA registries to match
>    RFC 8029, but there were still some ambiguities, that were
>    reflected in the registries.
> 
>    This document updates [RFC8029] and [RFC8126] by updating two
>    groups of registries.
> END
> 
> So we are updating RFC 8611, and the text that we add/change will be
> normative, does thai not make RFC 8611 a normative refrenece?
> 
> /Loa
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> 
> Loa Andersson                        email: [e-mail]
> Senior MPLS Expert
> Bronze Dragon Consulting             phone: [phone]
>