Re: [mpls] Working Group Last Call : draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-registries-update-04

Loa Andersson <loa.pi.nu@gmail.com> Mon, 09 November 2020 09:08 UTC

Return-Path: <loa.pi.nu@gmail.com>
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 EFE5B3A0D64; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 01:08:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 cM0Tkm2Za03W; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 01:08:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pf1-x430.google.com (mail-pf1-x430.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::430]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 91B4A3A0D58; Mon, 9 Nov 2020 01:08:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pf1-x430.google.com with SMTP id g7so7524546pfc.2; Mon, 09 Nov 2020 01:08:35 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to :date:cc:message-id:references:to; bh=suSlRwHbboVl4lN1ZZMl3CDiIqW85+YOTP8EoBQ41jo=; b=pjCFWw5ZsPeYJJtl0SEQwZVsJZE5LQ17MJyc54i7moDwjnT0qzvGrJHSB8rsczBU7A Q1g8JH5wgVjkdYpoepeDgOQHDv57olK5zuS8/ICZEpFkLLiDCaGVv1e6DS7KpweLyqtq cW3XZE0riRcdKqVgyD0VZUyV87v0rAzYeOeMITehjun6PD235tMVbVe7AxUz+8k7NShI Yotf3V7fgrfWWi2Aue9qGyKqKLy7A7n4lfUZoawPMkeeL3X9kURZGJ0Y/QSpuy6urPGC lJ26m7SRUaVFxTq3RFZROR0+APVPLvN/2EpEtppeAUPhu7hQ6gWrnqvQNdH6AD2/AKGE hbuA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject :from:in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id:references:to; bh=suSlRwHbboVl4lN1ZZMl3CDiIqW85+YOTP8EoBQ41jo=; b=r07QpJqaLPEHOJj92giMljjY/OLIpjzwoMrvz9MrldPDHGf2HwevbKZbXyfzrvd84r OIkgZvwPs28rCFl6NFoDKFXGLG3FfF3ax9VcmCEMm7PeurxNRleugOO4zty3xV+2WFHT Aqd3w0gUkPYXcici9ICo5J9rNgNNeOn8yR7z3nCS2+q8tWmS8bIzwU3gXmRqM5bCA9ze cBGp8FE1gr5g3vECzELECVQKkA9ylabx2nY+fufT1iEpKK7abd+YOqlJt/+DID8vdWpp Yu/Ot9Fb8Cbl5J3sMZRevbP9lFMaUUI8+ovlRN72jyvOnlWKNpYRRW7LHAPspH2ukzUw shxg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5323YZCwiLKoN9RhoX0RUcRuscMDVwRl+oqlyqxOGiS0P5OwtMrT T/GutP9Pu9jdhAD16TQoq1k=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw3jlk6O75WMSE7ayCygx5UKTdbr6kANBSA2hJtkvIngKBM8MU+oFwN6DJWbrUHcNCDY+EJ0w==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:150c:: with SMTP id le12mr12184615pjb.139.1604912915061; Mon, 09 Nov 2020 01:08:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.4] ([124.104.122.18]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id mm23sm10942183pjb.31.2020.11.09.01.08.33 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 09 Nov 2020 01:08:34 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
From: Loa Andersson <loa.pi.nu@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CY4PR05MB35762946F636996BBAE14C15D5EA0@CY4PR05MB3576.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2020 17:08:30 +0800
Cc: "adrian@olddog.co.uk" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>, mpls <mpls@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-registries-update@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-registries-update@ietf.org>
Message-Id: <479AB399-1C8C-4564-AC2F-84374C27814D@gmail.com>
References: <CY4PR05MB35762946F636996BBAE14C15D5EA0@CY4PR05MB3576.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
To: Shraddha Hegde <shraddha=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (17G80)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/f1yT_68ASUPyW_gjssPTJsXL4rQ>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Working Group Last Call : draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-registries-update-04
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: Mon, 09 Nov 2020 09:08:37 -0000

Shraddha,

I have been waiting for that question. The reason I did not change to FCFS is that there are only four “private use” code points. If you make them FCFS there is a risk that they will be used up very quickly. IANA documents the allocation of FCFS code points, so as soon as the fourth code is allocated, they are gone. 

This is true for Message Types, Reply Modes and Return Codes. 

In all fairness I did not think keeping them “private use” was ideal, but it was the least harmful alternative I could find. 

T

/Loa 

Sent from my iPhone

> On 9 Nov 2020, at 15:32, Shraddha Hegde <shraddha=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> I have read the -05 version of the document and find it useful and clear on IANA code point
> Registry usage. I have a question on the registry update.
> The TLVs and sub-TLV registry "vendor private" code points has been update to " FCFS" while the
> Message type/return code etc registry types have been left as "private use".
> Any specific reason for not changing them to "FCFS" ?
> 
> Rgds
> Shraddha
> 
> 
> Juniper Business Use Only
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mpls <mpls-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel
> Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2020 10:02 PM
> To: 'mpls' <mpls@ietf.org>
> Cc: draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-registries-update@ietf.org
> Subject: [mpls] Working Group Last Call : draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-registries-update-04
> 
> [External Email. Be cautious of content]
> 
> 
> Hi MPLS WG,
> 
> As previously noted, I'm the shepherd for this document and I'm running the working group last call as agreed by the chairs.
> 
> This email starts a two-week last call on
> draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-registries-update-04
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-registries-update/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!VW78XGy-uR3ChuXVvRR0JKhySp_wD_Uq4kMjc1Bpc8jk-JZRx6oojaG4eBsY_Edo$
> 
> Please send your opinions to the mailing list before October 9th.
> 
> While yes/no opinions are not without value, it is far more helpful if you can indicate whether you have read the latest version of the draft, and what the reasons are for your opinions.
> 
> Of course, all of your review comments will be helpful in improving the document.
> 
> Best,
> Adrian
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@ietf.org
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!VW78XGy-uR3ChuXVvRR0JKhySp_wD_Uq4kMjc1Bpc8jk-JZRx6oojaG4eNVcT4XQ$
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls