[mpls] [IANA #1215972] Re: Request for early code point allocations for I-D.draft-ietf-mpls-egress-tlv-for-nil-fec

[Amanda Baber via RT <[e-mail]>]

Hi all,

We've completed the early allocations for this document, but we have one minor question about the TLV assignment.

We've added the following entry to the Return Codes registry:

Value: 36
Meaning: Replying router is an egress for the prefix in EGRESS-TLV (TEMPORARY - registered 2021-11-08, expires 2022-11-08)
Reference: [draft-ietf-mpls-egress-tlv-for-nil-fec-01]

We've added the following entry to the TLVs registry:

Type: 28
TLV Name: EGRESS TLV (TEMPORARY - registered 2021-11-08, expires 2022-11-08)
Reference: [draft-ietf-mpls-egress-tlv-for-nil-fec-01]
Sub-TLV Registry: No Sub-TLVs

Question: would it be appropriate to remove "TLV" from the name of the TLV? Many registrations don't include it.

Please see
https://www.iana.org/assignments/mpls-lsp-ping-parameters

If the document hasn't been approved for publication by September, we'll contact you about renewing the allocations.

Best regards,

Amanda Baber
IANA Operations Manager

On Sun Nov 07 14:10:55 2021, [e-mail] wrote:
> Hi IANA,
> 
> The MPLS working group requests early allocation of code points for
> draft-ietf-mpls-egress-tlv-for-nil-fec according to the description in
> section 7.1 and 7.2 of the draft.
> 
> Regards,
> Tarek (for MPLS WG co-chairs)
> 
> From: Martin Vigoureux <[e-mail]>
> Date: Wednesday, November 3, 2021 at 11:39 AM
> To: Tarek Saad <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] <rtg-
> [e-mail]>, [e-mail] <[e-mail]>,
> [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
> Subject: Re: Request for early code point allocations for I-D.draft-
> ietf-mpls-egress-tlv-for-nil-fec
> Hi Tarek,
> 
> I approve.
> 
> -m
> 
> Le 2021-11-03 à 16:04, Tarek Saad a écrit :
> > Hi Martin,
> >
> > This a request for early allocation of IANA codepoints as described
> > in
> > RFC 7120. Please see responses/remarks to process steps inline.
> >
> > 1.  The authors (editors) of the document submit a request for early
> >
> > allocation to the Working Group chairs, specifying which code
> >
> > points require early allocation and to which document they should
> >
> > be assigned.
> >
> > The document is stable and implementations are under way.
> >
> > The WG chairs are prepared to go ahead and request the earlly
> > allocations.
> >
> > 2.  The WG chairs determine whether the conditions for early
> >
> > allocations described in Section 2
> > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7120#section-2> are met,
> > particularly
> >
> > conditions (c) and (d).
> >
> > The WG chairs have reviewed the draft in the light of section 2 of
> > RFC
> > 7120 and determined that draft-ietf-mpls-egress-tlv-for-nil-fec meet
> > this criteria.
> >
> > 3.  The WG chairs gauge whether there is consensus within the WG that
> >
> > early allocation is appropriate for the given document.
> >
> > The WG chairs determined that there is consensus in the WG to go
> > ahead
> > and do the early allocation.
> >
> > 4.  If steps 2) and 3) are satisfied, the WG chairs request approval
> >
> > from the Area Director(s).  The Area Director(s) may apply
> >
> > judgement to the request, especially if there is a risk of
> >
> > registry depletion.
> >
> > This mail (Martin Vigoureux as responsible AD, with a copy to the
> > other
> > rtg-ads is the request according to this step in the process for
> > early
> > allocation according to the IANA section of
> > draft-ietf-mpls-egress-tlv-for-nil-fec.
> >
> > We request support for early allocation of the codes as requested in
> > IANA considerations section in draft-ietf-mpls-egress-tlv-for-nil-
> > fec, i.e.:
> >
> > * A new Type for “Egress TLV” from the "TLVs" registry of the
> >   "Multi-Protocol Label switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs)
> >   Ping parameters" namespace.
> > * A new Return Code for “Replying router is an egress for the
> >   EGRESS-TLV” from the "Return Codes" sub-registry of "Multi-Protocol
> >   Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping
> > Parameters".
> >
> > The WG chairs will wait for the response from the responsible AD
> > before
> > going ahead with step 5 in this process.
> >
> > 5.  If the Area Directors approve step 4), the WG chairs request IANA
> >
> > to make an early allocation.
> >
> > 6.  IANA makes an allocation from the appropriate registry, marking
> >
> > it as "Temporary", valid for a period of one year from the date
> >
> > of allocation.  The date of first allocation and the date of
> >
> > expiry are also recorded in the registry and made visible to the
> >
> > public.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Tarek (for MPLS WG Chairs)
> >