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

["Bert Wijnen (IETF)" <[e-mail]>]

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.

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
>