Re: [OPSAWG] WG consensus call for the IANA early assignment //RE: Adoption poll for draft-lear-ietf-netmod-mud-04

[Eliot Lear <[e-mail]>]

Hi Bert,


On 8/29/16 1:58 PM, Bert Wijnen (IETF) wrote:
> So, do you want early assignments for all the registries that
> are listed under your IANA considerations?
>
> There are quite a few as far as I can tell.
>

All but one of them are simply a way to emit the URL.  Unless we really
think the URL is going to change, and there isn't that much there to
change, there's not much risk.  I don't think it's a big deal to wait on
the media type, and I could envision some changes to the model.  In fact
I have one proposal I'm pondering.

Eliot


> Bert
>
> On 25/08/16 20:36, Eliot Lear wrote:
>> Hi Kent,
>>
>> We're doing some open source and would like to make it easier for
>> those who are coding to have to do a little less REcoding.  I
>> doubt very much we're going to see much change in the content or
>> format the URL or the option.  That's what most of the requests are
>> for.  Where I expect we will see change is in the content of the YANG
>> file.  There we have the option to bump the version # in the
>> URL if we think there has been any real uptake of earlier versions.
>>
>> Fair enough?
>>
>> Eliot
>>
>>
>> On 8/25/16 7:27 PM, Kent Watsen wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Why is an early assignment being requested?   I think it unusual,
>>> especially for a draft that was just adopted, and no
>>> justification is given for why it’s needed other than “to assist
>>> with interoperable development”...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Kent
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From: *OPSAWG <[e-mail]> on behalf of Zhoutianran
>>> <[e-mail]>
>>> *Date: *Tuesday, August 23, 2016 at 5:46 AM
>>> *To: *Eliot Lear <[e-mail]>, Warren Kumari <[e-mail]>
>>> *Cc: *"[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]"
>>> <[e-mail]>
>>> *Subject: *[OPSAWG] WG consensus call for the IANA early assignment
>>> //RE: Adoption poll for draft-lear-ietf-netmod-mud-04
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Since the authors of the draft-ietf-opsawg-mud-00 asked for the
>>> early assignment for various registries from IANA, I would like to
>>> ask the WG consensus.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> There will be 1 week since today. You can express your support or
>>> objection.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> If there is no objection, I would like to request from the WG.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The following is a list of IANA considerations copied from the draft.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Tianran
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 15.  IANA Considerations
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 15.1.  DHCPv4 and DHCPv6 Options
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>    IANA is requested to allocated the DHCPv4 and v6 options as
>>> specified
>>>
>>>    in Section 9.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 15.2.  PKIX Extensions
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>    The IANA is requested to assign a value for id-pe-mud-uri in the
>>> "SMI
>>>
>>>    Security for PKIX Certificate Extension" Registry.  Its use is
>>>
>>>    specified in Section 10.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 15.3.  Well Known URI Suffix
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>    The IANA is requested to register the URL suffix of "mud" as
>>> follows:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>    o URI Suffix: "mud" o Specification documents: this document o
>>>
>>>    Related information: n/a
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 15.4.  MIME Media-type Registration for MUD files
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>    The following media-type is defined for transfer of MUD file:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>    o Type name: application
>>>
>>>    o Subtype name: mud+json
>>>
>>>    o Required parameters: n/a
>>>
>>>    o Optional parameters: n/a
>>>
>>>    o Encoding considerations: 8bit; application/mud+json values
>>>
>>>      are represented as a JSON object; UTF-8 encoding SHOULD be
>>>
>>>      employed.
>>>
>>>    o Security considerations: See {{secon}} of this document.
>>>
>>>    o Interoperability considerations: n/a
>>>
>>>    o Published specification: this document
>>>
>>>    o Applications that use this media type: MUD controllers as
>>>
>>>      specified by this document.
>>>
>>>    o Fragment identifier considerations: n/a
>>>
>>>    o Additional information:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>        Magic number(s): n/a
>>>
>>>        File extension(s): n/a
>>>
>>>        Macintosh file type code(s): n/a
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>    o Person & email address to contact for further information:
>>>
>>>      Eliot Lear <[e-mail]>, Ralph Droms <[e-mail]>
>>>
>>>    o Intended usage: COMMON
>>>
>>>    o Restrictions on usage: none
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>    o Author: Eliot Lear <[e-mail]>, Ralph Droms
>>> <[e-mail]>
>>>
>>>    o Change controller: IESG
>>>
>>>    o Provisional registration? (standards tree only): No.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 15.5.  LLDP IANA TLV Subtype Registry
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>    IANA is requested to create a new registry for IANA Link Layer
>>>
>>>    Discovery Protocol (LLDP) TLV subtype values.  The recommended
>>> policy
>>>
>>>    for this registry is Expert Review.  The maximum number of
>>> entries in
>>>
>>>    the registry is 256.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>    IANA is required to populate the initial registry with the value:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>    LLDP subtype value = 1
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>    Description = the Manufacturer Usage Description (MUD) Uniform
>>>
>>>    Resource Locator (URL)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>    Reference = < this document >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:*Eliot Lear [mailto:[e-mail]]
>>> *Sent:* Monday, August 22, 2016 7:04 PM
>>> *To:* Warren Kumari
>>> *Cc:* Zhoutianran; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
>>> *Subject:* Re: Adoption poll for draft-lear-ietf-netmod-mud-04
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Warren, Tianran, and all,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 8/17/16 4:17 PM, Warren Kumari wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>         Second, and hopefully not that more of a controversy, I
>>> would like to
>>>         request early IANA assignments to assist with interoperable
>>>         development.  These would be listed in the IANA
>>> considerations section
>>>         of the current draft.  If we need a WG draft to make this
>>> happen, that's
>>>         fine with me, but we should do a quick rev after the
>>> assignments.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>     I believe that this *can* be accomplished without it being a WG
>>> doc, but it is better / cleaner / easier if we make it a WG
>>>     doc and then ask for early assistant. We are fine with lots of
>>> revisions / it being submitted and then quickly revised.
>>>
>>>
>>> Just following up on this point: we'd like to request early
>>> assignment from IANA for the various registries.  Does that go through
>>> the chairs or the authors at this point?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Eliot
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OPSAWG mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
>>
>